U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Community Involvement Plan Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site Naplate, Illinois
September 2011 Table of Contents 1. Introduction...... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Community Involvement Plan...... 1-1 1.2 Community Involvement Plan Overview...... 1-2 2. Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site Background...... 2-1 2.1 Site Description...... 2-1 2.2 Site History and Cleanup...... 2-2 3. Community Background...... 3-1 3.1 Ottawa Community Demographics...... 3-1 3.2 Past Community Involvement Efforts...... 3-3 4. Detailed Summary of Community Interviews...... 4-1 5. Community Concerns and Questions...... 5-1 5.1 Potential Health Effects...... 5-1 5.2 Effect on Animals...... 5-1 5.3 Environmental Effects from Site Cleanup...... 5-2 5.4 Site Reuse Plans...... 5-2 6. The EPA’s Community Involvement Activities for the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site...... 6-1 6.1 Specific Community Involvement Activities...... 6-1 6.2 Timeframe for Conducting Community Involvement Activities...... 6-5 6.3 Evaluating the Community Involvement Efforts...... 6-6 7. What is Superfund?...... 7-1 7.1 Hazard Ranking System ...... 7-1 7.2 The EPA’s Nine Criteria ...... 7-2 7.3 The Community’s Role ...... 7-3 7.4 Superfund Alternative Sites...... 7-4 8. Community Engagement and the Superfund Process...... 8-1 8.1 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection...... 8-2 8.2 Placement on the National Priorities List...... 8-2 8.3 Study of Contamination on the Site and Possible Cleanup Options ...... 8-2 8.4 Preferred Alternative / Cleanup Plan...... 8-4 8.5 Cleanup Design and Construction...... 8-5 8.6 Treatment Process Completion...... 8-6 8.7 Operation and Maintenance/5-Year Reviews...... 8-6 8.8 National Priorities List Deletion...... 8-6 8.9 Reuse...... 8-7
i Appendix A – Glossary...... A-1 Appendix C – List of Contacts and Interested Groups...... C-1 Federal Elected Officials...... C-1 State Elected Officials...... C-1 State Agencies...... C-1 Information Repository...... C-2 Media – Newspapers...... C-2 Media – Television...... C-3 Appendix D – List of Fact Sheets...... D-1 Appendix E – Interview Questions...... E-1 Community Interviews Questions (May 24-26, 2011) ...... E-1
ii 1. Introduction
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prepared this Community Involvement Plan for the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Superfund Alternative site in the Village of Naplate and Ottawa Township, located in LaSalle County, Illinois. Words appearing in bold are defined in Appendix A.
1.1 Purpose of this Community Involvement Plan This CIP was prepared to support environmental investigation and cleanup activities at the site. The Plan considers community concerns, questions, and information needs as expressed during interviews conducted in May 2011. It also describes the EPA’s plan for addressing the community’s concerns and keeping residents informed and involved in decisions regarding the site cleanup and reuse of the property after the cleanup. This CIP is a working document that will evolve based on input from the community and as the investigation and cleanup process continues; it is intended to be flexible, adaptable and used as a guideline for the EPA’s communication with the public. The EPA is releasing this document to the public to help guide communication with the residents and other interested stakeholders of the Naplate and Ottawa areas. If you have comments or questions about this CIP, please contact: Heriberto León Community Involvement Coordinator EPA 77 W. Jackson Blvd., SI-7J Chicago, IL 60604-3590 Phone: 312-886-6163 or 800-621-8431 ext. 66163 [email protected]
1-1 1.2 Community Involvement Plan Overview This CIP contains the following sections: ■■ Section 1—Introduction: Describes the purpose and intended uses of this CIP. ■■ Section 2— Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site Background: Provides background information about the site’s location and history. ■■ Section 3—Community Background: Profiles the economic and ethnic makeup of the community and summarizes the community’s history and past involvement at the site. ■■ Section 4—Detailed Summary of Community Interviews: Provides a summary of what interviewees told EPA about the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site. See “What the EPA Heard about the Site” on Page 4-5 for interesting things people said about the site. ■■ Section 5—Community Concerns and Questions: Presents information obtained from local residents and officials during community interviews conducted in May 2011. ■■ Section 6—The EPA’s Community Involvement Goals: Describes the EPA’s plans and timeline for conducting site-specific activities to keep residents informed and involved during site cleanup activities. ■■ Section 7—What is Superfund: Provides the background of the program and its goals. ■■ Section 8—Community Engagement and the Superfund Process: Provides an overview of the step-by-step process the EPA follows to determine the best way to clean up a contaminated site and opportunities for community involvement throughout the process. ■■ Appendix A—Glossary: Provides definitions of key words. ■■ Appendix B—Site Information Repository, Administrative Record, and Public Meeting Locations: Identifies places where community members can find more information on activities at the Ottawa Township Flat Glass site. ■■ Appendix C—List of Contacts and Interested Groups: Provides a list of federal, state and local agencies, and community and environmental organizations. ■■ Appendix D—List of Fact Sheets: Lists fact sheets that the EPA has created and distributed to local residents to explain planned and ongoing site activities. ■■ Appendix E—List of Interview Questions: Provides the list of questions the EPA asked during interviews with local residents and officials in May 2011.
1-2 ■■ 1.3 Why Community Engagement is Important for Superfund Cleanups The objective of community involvement is to involve the public in activities and decisions related to the investigation and cleanup of hazardous waste sites. The community engagement program promotes communication between members of the public and the EPA. The EPA has learned that its decision-making ability is enhanced by actively soliciting comments and information from the public. Public input can be useful in two ways: ■■ Communities provide valuable information on local history, resident involvement, and site conditions. ■■ By expressing its concerns, the community assists the EPA in developing a response that more effectively addresses the community’s needs. Communities should be involved in all phases of the cleanup so that contamination is found and addressed in a way that protects people and the environment – now and in the future. Communities need to provide input on how the cleanup will be conducted, and understand how it may affect community plans and goals. Community members, former employees, and local government officials may be able to provide valuable information about a hazardous waste site that can help the EPA determine the best way to clean it up. Local information can help determine the location of contamination, how people may be exposed to the contamination, and how the land may be used after it is cleaned up. If contamination will be managed at the site for long periods of time, the communities and local governments need to be consulted about how to apply institutional controls to prevent human exposure. Community members also may be able to provide information that will help monitor the effectiveness of the cleanup over the long term, such as reporting trespassing, flooding, odors or other unusual conditions.
1-3
2. Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site Background
This section describes the Ottawa Township Flat Glass site and summarizes the history of activities at the site.
2.1 Site Description The Ottawa Township Flat Glass (OTFG) Site is located 60 miles west of downtown Chicago in Naplate as well as in and around the City of Ottawa in Ottawa Township, La Salle County, Illinois, along the north and south side of the Illinois River. The north side property is a 228-acre area that contains a glass manufacturing facility (Plant #5 – active – and Plant #7– currently inactive), also known as the Libby-Owens Ford Plants 5 & 7. (The facility has been owned and managed by Pilkington North America since 1986.) The north area also includes former silica sand quarries, wastewater disposal areas and a 56-acre undeveloped parcel of land. Across from the facility on the south side of the river in South Ottawa are additional former silica sand quarries and wastewater disposal areas that are also part of the site (Figure 2-1).
FIGURE 2-1 Site Map © 2011, Hull & Associates, Inc.
0 200 400 800 Feet
1:9,600
Quarry 4 56-Acre Parcel
OU1 Quarry 3
Cargill Property Quarry 2
Old Sand Pit OU3 - Wastewater Quarry 1 Discharge Areas Plaster Pit
Plant 5 Auxillary 4H Property Sand Pond Plant 7 OU4 Legend PNA Property OU4 Plaster Pit Coal Storage Area Original US Silica Pot Glass Areas Pit C Sand Pond Sand Ponds Quarries OU 1 OU 3 (Wastewater Discharge Areas) OU2 - Illinois River OU 4 near-shore sediments 56 Acre Parcel adjacent to Sand Pond September 2011 Remedial Investigation / Baseline Human Health Figure and Ecological Risk Assessment - Operable Units 3 & 4 Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site Site Plan 6397 Emerald Parkway Phone: (614) 793-8777 1 Suite #200 Fax: (614) 793-9070 Pilkington North America, Inc. Dublin, Ohio 43016 www.hullinc.com Village of Naplate, La Salle County, Illinois Produced using ArcGIS 10.0 SP1 File Name: PNA012_04_Fig01_SitePlan_A1.mxd Edited: 9/13/2011 By: jslifer
2-1 The facility began making flat glass products in 1907 and used arsenic trioxide as an ingredient until 1970 when its use was discontinued. The manufacturing process resulted in waste made up of sand, water and glass particles, which included arsenic. This waste was disposed of into the site’s silica sand quarries. The waste solids settled and the wastewater flowed into the Illinois River. It also resulted in arsenic contamination in the underlying ground water for the area.
2.2 Site History and Cleanup Pilkington North America (PNA) bought the facility from Libby-Owens-Ford in 1986 and continues to operate the glass plant to date. The EPA divided the OTFG site into four portions called “operable units” or OUs for ease of investigating and cleaning up the site. WHAT IS ARSENIC? These are: OU1 Residential Soils, OU2 Illinois River Sediment, OU3 Groundwater and Arsenic is the contaminant of Source Areas south of the river and OU4 Groundwater and Source Areas north of the river. concern at the site. It is a poison in high doses and a potential OU1 – Residential Soils cancer-causing compound for humans through prolonged In 2002, high arsenic levels were found in shallow (0 to 6 inches) and deep (greater than exposure to much lower amounts. 12 inches) layers of soil in two residential yards, where arsenic-polluted material had People or animals that come into been placed to fill in low spots of land to allow for a house to be built.An emergency contact with arsenic-contaminated cleanup was conducted at those two yards in 2005, when 3,325 cubic yards of soil and soil or that drink arsenic- contaminated material were safely removed and disposed of offsite. The two yards were contaminated water could be at then backfilled with clean soil and the lots were reseeded. The soil sampling program was risk, depending on duration and increased in 2005 to include almost all of the homes in Naplate, resulting in more than arsenic exposure levels as well as 2,000 soil samples in total. Arsenic levels in the majority of these residences indicated other factors. no immediate threat levels. In September 2008, EPA – in consultation with IL EPA – determined in its record of decision that for OU1 Residential Soils no further remedial action would be necessary to protect public health or welfare or the environment.
OU2 – Illinois River Sediment PNA collected sediment samples from the Illinois River in 2001 and 2002 and conducted surveys to measure the depth of the water and the shape of the riverbed. Data from this effort indicated potential sediment contamination along the north side of the river next to the site. PNA also took sediment samples of the Illinois River upstream of the site and concluded that this area was not impacted by arsenic from the site. U.S. Geologic Survey data collected over a period of about 10 years confirmed this conclusion. In addition, water quality data from the 1990s did not show any measurable amount of arsenic in the river water. The EPA concluded that the sediment contaminated with arsenic is stable and
2-2 FIGURE 2-2 Aerial View of the Ottawa Township Flat Glass site
will not likely be washed away by river water, that it has little or no effect on river quality, and that it displays little or no toxicity to river organisms. In September 2008, a record of decision was signed declaring no action was needed for OU2 Illinois River Sediment.
OU3 – Ground water and source areas south of the Illinois River Beginning in 1986, PNA placed ground water monitoring wells in and around the site to monitor the level of ground water contamination. There are two aquifers1 that are being monitored below the site: an upper aquifer (St. Peter) that has been contaminated with arsenic and a lower aquifer (New Richmond) that has not. A 150 to 200 feet rock layer separates the two aquifers, acting as a barrier. Some parts of the upper aquifer contain amounts of arsenic 800 times higher than what is recommended for safe drinking standards. The Village of Naplate has its municipal water well screened in the lower New Richmond Sandstone and it is not impacted by arsenic.
1 Aquifers are water-bearing rock formations in the ground. 2-3 EPA performed a health risk assessment to determine if the current levels of arsenic from groundwater are dangerous to the health of the residents. The assessment concluded that the risk of illness is low, but exposure should be limited. PNA has been supplying bottle water to four properties near the OU3 area south of the river, and maintains a reverse osmosis filter system in a fifth property, to prevent consumption of water with arsenic above the EPA safety standards On September 29, 2010, EPA signed an interim record of decision for OU3– which covers the underlying ground water and source areas south of the Illinois River– to protect people and wildlife from exposure to arsenic and to make the water safe enough for drinking. The cleanup plan for OU3 involves redirecting stormwater drainage on PNA property away from the site’s waste quarries on the south side of the river. This is intended to reduce the movement of arsenic-contaminated ground water that spreads off PNA’s property. Redirecting the stormwater drainage will also allow the area ground water to flow more directly into the Illinois River, which will dilute the arsenic concentrations in the ground water. Alternate water supplies will continue to be provided to homes that currently are impacted by arsenic. Limitations on putting new wells into the St. Peter Aquifer will help reduce the chances of future exposures. The EPA will continue to check the levels of arsenic in the ground water for at least the next 10 years, or until the drinking water standard is met.
OU4 – Ground water and source areas north of the Illinois River As in OU3, arsenic concentrations in the St. Peter aquifer vary widely and are highest in areas directly below portions of the PNA property, but the underlying New Richmond aquifer is not impacted by arsenic. The St. Peter aquifer is not used for drinking water at or near OU4. Naplate’s municipal drinking water source is the New Richmond aquifer. EPA continues to work with PNA on generating cleanup options for OU4. Based on the results of this study phase, EPA will develop a Proposed Plan for cleaning up the site. The Agency will issue a public notice through the local media to notify the community, so interested members of the community can comment on the Proposed Plan. The Agency may hold a public meeting to discuss the Proposed Plan and invite comments from community members.
2-4 11 2011 20 Community May 2011, interviews were held for the CIP. 1102 . OU3 or f on isi ec 0102 2010 September 29, 2010, The September 29, 2010, signed a record of EPA decision for OU3. d held a public comment period. held a public meeting concerning the cleanup plan for the Ottawa Township Flat Glass site. August 19- September 18, 2009, The EPA EPA August 26, 2009, The EPA 2009 200 9 8002 2008 and comments. 40023002 . d e t e l 2004 was proposedby the EPA for was proposedby the EPA June 2008: No further action a record of decision declaring September 2008: The EPA signed The EPA September 2008: June 28, 2008: Public hearing held by the EPA for community questions by the EPA no action needed for the Illinois River. residential yards and the Illinois River. s was comp d ar yards was completed. y 03 Cleanup action of the two 2003 20 200268910791-7091 2002 contaminated residential yards. or concern. f December 2003, Pilkington North January 15, 2003, EPA requested January 15, 2003, EPA evaluating health risk to residents. 2002-2004 e s Substances and Disease Registry in ’s supervision, America, with the E PA ’s assistance from the Agency for Toxic Toxic Agency for assistance from the performed emergency cleanup of the two are cau t a 86 th that are cause for concern. 1986 19 Ground water monitoring wells installed in and around the site levels of arsenic in shallow and residential areas and found high the facility. conducted soil sampling in Naplate deeper soil in two residential yards. Late 2002: Pilkington North America Late 2002: Pilkington North discovered two underground aquifers Pilkington North America purchased 7. & 5 5 & 7. 1907-1970 making at Libby- Owens-Ford Plants Arsenic trioxide was an ingredient in glass FIGURE 2-3 Flat Glass site Involvement at Ottawa Township and EPA Site Timeline 2-5
3. Community Background
This section describes the Ottawa community and summarizes the history of community involvement at the Ottawa Township Flat Glass site.
3.1 Ottawa Community Demographics The OTFG site is located in Naplate as well as in and around the City of Ottawa in Ottawa Township, La Salle County, Illinois, along the north and south sides of the Illinois River. According to the U.S. Census, the 2009 population was 511 for Naplate, 19,324 for Ottawa and 112,498 for LaSalle County. This reflects a small population decrease for Naplate of 12 (about 2.29 percent), an increase for Ottawa of 1,017 (about 5.56 percent) and a slight increase in population (989 or about .89 percent) for LaSalle County, compared to the 2000 census. According to the 2009 Census, the population of Naplate is 98.6 percent white and 1.1 percent Hispanic or Latino. Ottawa’s population is predominantly white (92.7 percent), followed by Hispanic or Latino making up 6.5 percent of the population. American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Asians, and African Americans comprise a total of 2.5 percent of the population. According to the 2005-2009 American Community Survey census, the median age was 40.3 for Naplate residents and 40.6 for Ottawa residents. Approximately 65.5 percent of the households in Naplate were family households with about 29.8 percent of families with children under 18 years of age. About 10.7 percent of the non-family households were made up of people aged 65 or older. In Ottawa, about 59.3 percent of households were families, 26.6 percent having children below 18 years of age. Approximately 13.6 percent of non-family households were comprised of people aged 65 or older. About 1.1 percent of Naplate residents speak a language other than English at home, with 0 percent indicating they speak English “less than very well.” However, 4.7 percent of Ottawa residents speak a second language at home and 2.1 percent of them indicated they speak English “less than very well.” In Naplate, about 79.3 percent of the population of 25 years of age or older have attained a high school diploma or higher; 15.4 percent of those have attained a bachelor’s degree or higher. About 63.6 percent of the population
1 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009 Census. 2009 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, Tables P1, P2, P3, P4, H1. 2 Ottawa City, Illinois ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2005-2009. Data Set: 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey Naplate Village, Illinois ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2005-2009. Data Set: 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey
3-1 TABLE 1 Community Demographics
Naplate Ottawa LaSalle County State of Illinois 2009 Population 511 19,324 112,498 12,910,409
Change from 2000 census -2.29% +5.56% +.89% +3.95%
Demographics
White 98.6% 92.7% 93.7% 71.9%
Latino/Hispanic 1.1% 6.5% 7% 14.6%
Other 0% 2.5% 1.6% 19.1%
Median age 40.3 years 40.6 years 40 years 35.9 years
Households
Family 65.5% 59.3% 67.4% 66.1%
With children under 18 29.9% 26.6% 29.9% 31.4%
Non-family 65 & older 10.7% 13.6% 11.7% 9.6%
Language other than English spoken at home 1.1% 4.7% 6.8% 21.3%
Speak English “less than very well” 0% 2.1% 2.8% 9.5%
With high school diploma 79.3% 87.9% 87.4% 85.7%
With bachelor’s degree 15.4% 17.6% 15.5% 29.8%
In the labor force 63.6% 65.8% 66.6% 66.7%
Median household income $37,143 $44,240 $50,270 $55,222
Per capita income $17,650 $24,625 $24,605 $28,469
Income below poverty 6.8% 11.9% 10.6% 12.4%
3-2 16 years of age or older are in the labor force. In Ottawa, about 87.9 percent of the population above 25 years have attained a high school diploma or higher, with 17.6 having attained a Bachelor’s degree. About 65.8 percent of 16 year olds and older are in the labor force. The 2009 estimated median household income in Naplate was $37,143 (in 2009 inflation- adjusted dollars), compared to $44,240 in Ottawa and $55,222 in the state of Illinois for the same year. The 2009 per capita income was $17,650 in Naplate and $24,625 in Ottawa. Approximately 6.8 percent of the Naplate population had incomes below the poverty level, compared to 11.9 percent in Ottawa and 12.4 percent in the state. Naplate residents are primarily employed in educational services; health care and social assistance; arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food service; and manufacturing. Ottawa residents are primarily employed in educational services; health care and social assistance; retail trade; and manufacturing. Ottawa is a mayor-commission form of government. The mayor and commissioners are elected at-large to 4-year terms of office. Council meetings are held on the first and third Tuesdays of the month. The Council is assisted by a Board of Fire and Police Commissioners, Industrial Development Commission, Plan Commission, Environmental Advisory Committee, and Zoning Board of Appeals.
3.2 Past Community Involvement Efforts Throughout the years, the EPA, the Illinois EPA, and the Illinois Department of Health have conducted outreach activities associated with the Ottawa Township Flat Glass site, as shown in Exhibit 3-1. The EPA’s community involvement efforts have included meeting with residents, conducting public meetings, publishing fact sheets, as well as issuing update letters and press releases. Site-related information can be accessed on the EPA’s Web site (http://www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/naplate). Most recently, the EPA conducted interviews with residents and elected officials May 24-26, 2011, in preparation for compiling this CIP. Additionally, the EPA has established an information repository at the Reddick Library located at 1010 Canal Street in Ottawa. The repository contains site- related documents such as technical reports, sampling results, general information about the EPA and the Superfund program, public meeting transcripts, press releases, and other information. Repository documents are available for public review and photocopying during the library’s hours of operation (Appendix B). The community interviews conducted in May 2011 represent the EPA’s continuing efforts to keep the community informed and solicit input. More detail on these interviews and community involvement activities is provided in Sections 6 and 8 and Appendix E.
3-3 EXHIBIT 3-1 Site-Specific Community Involvement Efforts Past Community Involvement at Ottawa Township Flat Glass site
Fact Sheets June 2008 Fact Sheets (No Further Cleanup Action Proposed for August 2009 Yards, River) (Interim Cleanup for Polluted Underground Water Supply) Public Meetings June 24, 2008 (community questions and Public Meetings opinions about proposed cleanup plan) August 26, 2009 (EPA interim cleanup plan) Community Interviews Public Comment Periods Public Comment Periods May 24-26, 2011 June 16 - July 16, 2008 August 19 - September 18, 2009 2008 2009 2011
3-4 4. Detailed Summary of Community Interviews
To learn about resident and community concerns regarding the site, the EPA held several community interviews May 24-26, 2011. The EPA talked with local officials and residents living and working near the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site and asked them about various issues related to the contamination and cleanup at the site, and how the community involvement and communication processes could be improved. Below are the specific questions the EPA asked and a summary of the answers that were provided at the community interviews. Note to the reader: This summary is intended to faithfully record and reflect the issues and concerns expressed to the EPA by residents, officials, and others on the days of the community interviews. By necessity, this is a collection of opinions, thoughts, and feelings. Therefore, please be cautioned that the statements contained in this section may or may not be factual, and that the opinions and concerns expressed may or may not be valid.
1. How long have you lived at your current address? Several people reported living in the area for their entire lives. Other answers ranged from 3 years to more than 50 years.
2. Do you rent or are you the owner of the property? The vast majority of people interviewed own their property.
3. Do you operate a business from your property/ do you own other properties in the community? Most people said that they do not operate a business from their property or own other properties in the community. However, one of the interviewers owns a local restaurant and a small number own another property in Naplate.
4-1 4. What do you know about the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site? Many people said that they knew about the arsenic in the water, although a few were unaware that the EPA is still trying to clean up the pollution. A few of the interviewees knew that the arsenic contamination was caused by the glass making process. Some people were familiar with the related court case. Numerous people interviewed mentioned that the site used to be a major employer in the area and now has a much smaller number of employees, and most were unhappy with this. Others knew about the arsenic in residential areas or noticed trucks going in and out.
5. Have you, or do you have friends or family who have worked on the site? Many of those interviewed had family members or knew numerous people who have worked on the site, mostly parents and grandparents. Some have worked there personally. Some mentioned that people that they knew who worked there died young and of cancer. Only two people did not know anyone who worked there.
6. Do you have any concerns about the site? Almost everyone had concerns about the site. The most common concern was about drinking water and health. Other concerns included the contaminated soil and if it affects gardening, animals in the area, and the change in what the EPA said is a tolerable contamination level. Some people are worried about not being able to sell their house because buyers hear about the pollution and it creates a stigma. Safety of teeth brushing and properties with arsenic were also mentioned. Only two people were not concerned at all about the site.
7. Has your property or water ever been tested? If so, were the results explained to you? People from both Naplate and Ottawa were interviewed, many of them said that they did not have their property or water tested, and some expressed interest in having it done. Some people said that they had had their water and property tested and that the results showed only a small amount of arsenic. Other people said that their water tested positive for arsenic and were given money, or they were provided with another source of water.
8. Do you think the site, in its current state, poses any risks to you or your children? Many people expressed concern about the risk to children who play in dirt and sand in their backyards. Some people mentioned that they thought there were no risks for the people who drink city water. However, an interviewee said that some wells were supposed to be shut down and weren’t. The link between arsenic and so many people dying of cancer was also brought up. Very few people thought there was no risk.
9. Has your enjoyment of the area been affected by the site? Most people reported that their enjoyment of the area has not been affected by the site. Some talked about limited access to the river, gardening challenges, lowered property values, and noisy trucks. One interviewee referred to the quarries as what used to be beautiful swimming pools.
4-2 10. What government officials have you interacted with about the site? Do you feel these officials have been responsive to your concerns? Many people had not interacted with any government officials about the site. If they interacted with government officials, they were usually from the EPA and one person mentioned state representatives. While some people perceived them to be very responsive, others thought that they were not helpful and holding back information.
11. How frequently do you think public meetings about the site should be held? Would you attend? Most of the people interviewed said that they would attend public meetings and that they should be held whenever there is any new information or milestones in order to keep the public updated. Some specific suggestions were one or two meetings each year or publishing more fact sheets about it instead.
12. What is a good meeting location? Most people thought that the Naplate Village Hall would be a good meeting location. Other suggestions were Festivities Unlimited Banquet Hall, Ottawa Court House, LaSalle County Etna Complex, Holiday Inn Express, the Fire Station and Ottawa Township High School auditorium.
13. Are you interested in receiving more information about the site? If yes, what’s the best way to provide that information to you (e-mail, regular mail)? Everyone was interested in receiving more information and some provided e-mail addresses.
14. What type of media (e.g., newspaper, Internet, radio) do you generally rely on for news and information? What stations and papers do you prefer? Most common responses were the newspapers Ottawa Daily Times, Ottawa Delivered and WCMY-AM radio. Other sources of media included WGLC-FM and Chicago news television channels such as CBS.
15. When possible, site information is posted on EPA’s Web site. Have you used the EPA Web site? www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/naplate The majority of interviewees have not used the EPA Web site, but about one-third of them have.
16. How interested are you in environmental issues in general? Most people reported being at least moderately interested in environmentally issues, with some being very passionate about it. Only two people were not interested at all.
4-3 17. Are there any other people or groups you think we should talk to about the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site either because they have unique information about the site, or they would like to know more about the site from the EPA? Some people gave names of personal friends. Other groups mentioned were directly affected citizens, Ottawa environmental groups, the health department, Glass Workers Union, Committee on Environmental Issues, and the mayor, who the EPA was able to speak with.
18. Concerning redevelopment, once the site is cleaned up how would you like the land to be used? Some ideas were to use the land for parks, river access, creation of jobs, or industrial or residential areas.
4-4 5. Community Concerns and Questions
Key concerns and questions raised during the community interviews are summarized below. The EPA published a question-and-answer fact sheet to respond to specific questions asked during the interviews. The fact sheet was distributed to individuals on the site mailing list and is posted on the EPA’s Web site (www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/naplate). Note to readers: All attempts were made to accurately present the issues, concerns, and questions expressed to the EPA by residents.
5.1 Potential Health Effects Interviewees’ opinions about the site’s potential health effects were mixed. While a few were not concerned at all, others were extremely worried. Many people worried more about children than about themselves. One of the biggest concerns was for children who play in the dirt and sand outside in their backyards, as well as at the site. Many people also wondered about a possible connection between the arsenic contamination and so many people dying of cancer, especially deaths among younger workers who had worked at the site. Interviewees did not think there was a potential health risk for those who drink city water, and they thought the risk was higher for those who have contamination on their property.
5.2 Effect on Animals Some people expressed concern for the wild animals in the area. One resident specifically talked about concern for all the bald eagles. It was noted that the damage is already done, and providing new water will not help these animals. Someone else said that the animals that graze on contaminated property are hunted and processed and this could also pose a risk for humans.
5-1 5.3 Environmental Effects from Site Cleanup There was concern about whether the soil would still be contaminated after the site is cleaned up. It was also asked whether contamination would enter sewage treatment plants and how the sewage system would be affected. There were also some questions about the discharge of sludge into the river and the impact it will have on the river. Someone wanted to be sure that the contamination would not leak down into the aquifers more.
5.4 Site Reuse Plans Everyone interviewed had ideas about what the site should be used for after it is cleaned up. Many suggestions were related to the environment, such as creating parks or creating an area with access to the river. Other ideas were industrial uses in order to create more jobs in the community, or residential areas. However, some were concerned about people living where so much pollution had been.
5-2 6. The EPA’s Community Involvement Activities for the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site U.S. laws and the EPA policy require that certain community engagement activities be conducted at designated milestones during the investigation and cleanup process. In addition, the EPA undertakes other activities to strengthen its communication with those affected by the contamination. A member of the EPA community involvement staff has been designated to respond directly to media and public inquiries regarding site activities. The goal of the EPA’s community involvement efforts is to achieve early and meaningful input, as well as keep the community informed during the site cleanup process. To that end, the EPA is committed to: ■■ Encouraging and enabling residents to get involved ■■ Listening carefully to community concerns ■■ Taking the time needed to deal with community concerns ■■ Changing planned actions, where warranted, based on community input ■■ Keeping the community informed of ongoing and planned activities ■■ Explaining to the community what the EPA has done and why The following activities are intended to provide opportunities for communication between the community and the EPA during the THE EPA HAS DESIGNATED TWO PEOPLE AS investigation and cleanup of the site. PRIMARY SITE CONTACTS FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS:
6.1 Specific Community Involvement Activities HERIVERTO LEÓN, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENTE COORDINATOR To address community concerns and questions described in Section 4, 312-886-6163 the EPA has conducted (or will conduct) the activities described below. Through these activities, the EPA’s goal is to inform, involve and NEFERTITI SIMMONS, engage the community during site cleanup decisions and efforts. REMEDIAL PROJECT MANAGER 312-886-6148 ■■ Designate the EPA’s Community Involvement They can both also be reached toll-free at Coordinator. Heriberto León is the primary liaison between the EPA 800-621-8431, weekdays 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and the site community. Mr. León serves as a point of contact for community members and fields general questions about the site. For technical site issues, Mr. León coordinates with the EPA’s Remedial Project Manager for the site, Nefertiti Simmons.
6-1 TO MAKE IT CONVENIENT FOR ■■ Establish a toll-free number for residents to ask questions and receive LOCAL RESIDENTS TO VIEW information. Mr. León and Ms. Simmons can be reached at 800-621-8431, weekdays SITE-RELATED INFORMATION, from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The goal is to improve the flow and ease of communication EPA HAS PLACED SITE between the EPA and the community. Residents can call this number as questions or INFORMATION AT THE concerns arise, rather than waiting for a public meeting or waiting to receive written PROJECT WEB SITE information. The EPA publishes this toll-free number periodically in the local papers http://www.epa.gov/region5/ and in all fact sheets. cleanup/naplate. ■■ Provide site information on the Internet. Many of the persons interviewed have access to and are accustomed to using the Internet. Residents and officials whom the EPA met with during the community interviews said they would like to see site documents on the Web site. Information on the site will be provided on the following the EPA Web site: http://epa. gov/region5/cleanup/naplate. ■■ Create and maintain a site-specific mailing list. The EPA has created a mailing list that includes all residences and businesses within an approximate 1-mile radius of the site and other interested parties who have requested to be kept informed about the site. To keep it current, the list is reviewed and revised periodically. The EPA uses the site mailing list to distribute written information such as fact sheets. This is a way to ensure that those who do not have access to the Internet or other information sources still receive information about the site. ■■ Establish and maintain a site-specific information repository. The EPA policy requires establishing an information repository for any site where the EPA is conducting cleanup activities. An information repository is a designated location (usually a library or other public building), which houses a file of site-specific documents and general information about the EPA programs. A site file found in an information repository typically includes legal documents, work plans, technical reports and copies of laws that are applicable and relevant to activities at the site. Establishing an information repository makes the site-related information more accessible to the public. The EPA has set up an information repository for the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site at the Reddick Library located at 1010 Canal Street. Many documents, plans and other finalized written materials generated during the investigation and cleanup have been and will continue to be placed in the repository for review and/or photocopying by the public. The EPA will notify community groups, local officials and interested residents on the mailing list of their locations. ■■ Write and distribute news releases and public notices. The EPA has released
SODQDQGLWLVEHLQJUHYLVHGE\*HRUJLD3DFL¿F,QLWLDOGDWD FROOHFWLRQIRU$UHDZLOOEHJLQLQODWHIDOOZLQWHURI IRUWK6WUHHW/DQG¿OO7KHDFWLYLWLHVLQFOXGHFDSSLQJ ZLWKH[WHQVLYHVRLODQGVHGLPHQWVDPSOLQJWRRFFXUGXULQJ RIFRQWDPLQDWHGSDSHUUHVLGXDOVDYHQWLODWLRQV\VWHPIRU WKHVXPPHURI ODQG¿OOJDVVHVDQXQGHUO\LQJJURXQGZDWHUPRQLWRULQJ V\VWHPDQGVLWHDFFHVVUHVWULFWLRQV STAGING Mill updates AREA 1 LEFT :LOORZ%RXOHYDUG$6LWH/DQG¿OODIVERSION Plainwell Mill STRUCTURE Public Information Meeting *HRUJLD3DFL¿FVXEPLWWHGDSUHOLPLQDU\FOHDQXSUHSRUW 'XULQJWKHVSULQJRI:H\HUKDHXVHU&RFROOHFWHGVRLO RIVERVIEW DR. WR(3$IRUWKH:LOORZ%RXOHYDUG$6LWH/DQG¿OO7KHRIGHT VDPSOHVIRUWKH3ODLQZHOO0LOOFOHDQXSLQYHVWLJDWLRQDQG DIVERSION FRPSDQ\ZLOOLQVWDOODSHUPDQHQWODQG¿OOFRYHUDODQG¿OOSTRUCTURE REMOVAL AREA 1 Wednesday, Nov. 3 ZLOOSURYLGHDUHSRUWWR(3$LQWKHVSULQJRI%DVHGPlainwell #2 Dam RemovalJDVYHQWLQJV\VWHPDQGDJURXQGZDWHUPRQLWRULQJV\VWHP RQWHUPVRIDVHWWOHPHQWZLWKWKHIHGHUDOJRYHUQPHQW DWWKHODQG¿OO7KHFOHDQXSSODQDOVRLQFOXGHVUHPRYLQJComfort Inn and Conference Center Weyerhaeuser has been investigating and sampling the REMOVAL AREA 5A 6:30 p.m. FRQWDPLQDWHGVRLOIURPQHDUE\ZHWODQGVDQGUHPRYLQJNovember 2010 PLOOZLWK(3$RYHUVLJKW(3$H[SHFWVWRUHOHDVHDFOHDQXSNears CompletionVKHHWSLOLQJ7KHVHFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVZLOOEHJLQLQ SODQLQDGRFXPHQWFDOOHGDUHFRUGRIGHFLVLRQLQ NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY Allied Paper/Portage Creek/Kalamazoo RiverDQGHQGLQ Superfund Site 622 Allegan St. ZLWKFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVWRIROORZ announcements to local newspapers, such as the Ottawa Daily Times and Ottawa Kalamazoo, Michigan $OOLHG3DSHU/DQG¿OO REMOVAL AREA 4A REMOVAL AREA 5B STAGINGPlainwell Landfill updates AREA 3 This fact sheet provides updates on the cleanup activities(3$LVVWXG\LQJFOHDQXSDOWHUQDWLYHVIRUWKHVLWH(3$ZLOO at the Allied WK6WUHHW/DQG¿OO REMOVAL AREA 4B Paper/Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River SuperfundVKDUHFOHDQXSUHFRPPHQGDWLRQVDQGSURSRVHGSODQZLWK site. U.S. Environmental WKHSXEOLFDQGDFFHSWFRPPHQWVLQWKHVSULQJRI %\WKHHQGRI:H\HUKDHXVHUZLOOFRPSOHWH3URWHFWLRQ$JHQF\KDVPDGHVLJQL¿FDQWSURJUHVVDWWKH3ODLQZHOO'DP REMOVAL AREA A Informational meetingFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHODQG¿OOFDSDQGPRQLWRULQJV\VWHPThe public is invited to attend the public meeting (see sidebar for details) to ISLAND 2 EPA is holding a public meeting learn more about the cleanup activities at the site. STAGING :HGQHVGD\1RYWRXSGDWHWKH Plainwell #2 Dam site background AREA 2 community about the Kalamazoo REMOVAL AREA 1 5LYHUFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVIRU ,Q-XQH *HRUJLD3DFL¿F//&DSDUW\UHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKHSROOXWLRQDWREMOVAL AREA 3B
WKHVLWHDQG(3$HQWHUHGLQWRDOHJDODJUHHPHQWFRPPLWWLQJ*HRUJLD3DFL¿FDOUGLAS AVE 7KHPHHWLQJZLOOVWDUWDW SP at the Comfort Inn and Conference WRFRQGXFWDQHPHUJHQF\FOHDQXSLQWKH3ODLQZHOO'DPDUHD'XULQJ &HQWHU$OOHJDQ6W3ODLQZHOO WKHODVWWZR\HDUV*HRUJLD3DFL¿FSHUIRUPHGVLJQL¿FDQWVRLODQGVHGLPHQW REMOVAL AREA 2 PXG VDPSOLQJLQWKLVORFDWLRQ%DVHGRQWKHVHVDPSOHV(3$GHWHUPLQHG ISLAND 1
EPA representatives and other WKDWDFOHDQXSVKRXOGRFFXUQHDUWKH'DPWRVWRSWKHFRQWLQXLQJUHOHDVH RI¿FLDOVZLOOPDNHDIRUPDO RI3&%V3&%VRUSRO\FKORULQDWHGELSKHQ\OVDLEGEND UHFKHPLFDOFRPSRXQGVZLWKfibers. recycled of made paper on printed is sheet fact This presentation and then be available common industrial uses. At high concentrations and exposures they can cause
WRGLVFXVVWKHVLWHDFWLYLWLHVZLWK LOOQHVVLQSHRSOHDQGZLOGOLIHREMOVAL AREA BOUNDARY 0 Plainwell #2 Dam Removal Nears Completion Nears 600 Removal Dam #2 Plainwell you individually. If you need special ROAD CENTERLINE DFFRPPRGDWLRQVDWWKHPHHWLQJ ,Q DFWLYLWLHVEHJDQWRUHPRYH3&%FRQWDPLQDWHGVRLODORQJWKHQRUWK GRAPHIC SCALE 1,200 Delivered; and local television and radio stations (Appendix C) to provide information RAILROAD FEET contact EPA Community Involvement VLGHRIWKH.DODPD]RR5LYHUDVSDUWRIWKH3ODLQZMEDIAN WATER LINE (APPROXIMATE) HOO'DPFOHDQXSSODQ &RRUGLQDWRU'RQGH%ODVLR VHH CLEARING/GRUBBING COMPLETE
$SSUR[LPDWHO\ IHHWRIULYHUEDQNZHUHFOHRIVER DUHGH[FDYDWHGDQGUHVWRUHG
REMOVAL COMPLETE EHORZ E\2FW $SSUR[LPDWHO\FXELF\DUGVRIVRLODQGGHSITE: EULVZHUHWDNHQIRUGLVSRVDOSUPERFUND RIVER CREEK/KALAMAZOO PAPER/PORTAGE ALLIED
Contact EPA 'XULQJWKHZLQWHURIFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVEHJDQRQWKHVRXWKVLGHRIWKHREMOVAL AND REPLANTING COMPLETE .DODPD]RR5LYHULQFOXGLQJH[FDYDWLRQGUHGJLQJDQGGLVSRVDORI3&%CLASS FIRST AREAS TARGETED FOR REMOVAL IN 2010 For more information or if you have contaminated soil and sediment. comments about the Kalamazoo River
FOHDQXSFRQWDFW Completed Plainwell #2 Dam cleanup activities Don de Blasio (3$KDVUHPRYHGDWRWDORIFXELF\DUGVRIFRQWDPLQDWHGVRLODQGREQUESTED SERVICE RETURN Community Involvement Coordinator VHGLPHQWDORQJIHHWRIULYHUEDQNLQWKLVDUHD'XULQJWKH DQG (3$5HJLRQ 6(- FOHDQXSFXELF\DUGVRIVRLODQGVHGLPHQWZHUHUHPRYHGIURP :-DFNVRQ%OYG&KLFDJR,/ OLQHDUIHHWRIULYHUEDQN0RUHWKDQVTXDUHIHHWRIULYHUEDQN KDYHEHHQUHVWRUHGLQFOXGLQJUHSODQWLQJZLWKQDWLYHYHJHWDWLRQ7KH RU 3ODLQZHOO'DPFOHDQXSSURMHFWZLOOEHFRPSOHWHGDWWKHHQGRI ([WZHHNGD\V DPWR 3 SPGHEODVLRGRQ#HSDJRY Additional cleanup studies You can read more information $)HEUXDU\OHJDODJUHHPHQWUHTXLUHGDGGLWLRQDOVWXG\RIWKH.DODPD]RR about the Kalamazoo River cleanup River and Portage Creek. Planners divided the river and creek into seven RQOLQHDW ZZZHSDJRYUHJLRQVLWHV DUHDVIRUFORVHUH[DPLQDWLRQ$UHDFRQVLVWVRIWKH.DODPD]RR5LYHU about events such as public meetings or opportunities for public comment. News NDOSURMHFW EHWZHHQ0RUURZ'DPDQG3ODLQZHOODQG3RUWDJH&UHHNEHWZHHQ&RUN6WUHHW DQGWKH.DODPD]RR5LYHU$OOVRLODQGVHGLPHQWVDPSOLQJDFWLYLWLHVDW$UHD2 KDYHEHHQFRPSOHWHGDQGDVLWHLQYHVWLJDWLRQUHSRUWZLOOEHVXEPLWWHGWR(3$ LQ$SULO
$SODQIRULQYHVWLJDWLQJWKH3&%FRQWDPLQDWLRQLQ$UHDZKLFKFRQVLVWVRI WKH.DODPD]RR5LYHUEHWZHHQWKHIRUPHU3ODLQZHOO'DPDQGWKH2WVHJR&LW\ 'DPZDVVXEPLWWHGWR(3$LQ-XO\(3$VXEPLWWHGFRPPHQWVRQWKH releases allow the EPA to reach large audiences quickly. They are posted on the EPA’s Web site, www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/naplate. The EPA typically publishes news releases and public notices to announce major events such as comment periods, public meetings and major milestones such as the selection of a cleanup remedy.
6-2 ■■ Prepare and distribute fact sheets and site updates. The EPA has produced fact sheets and update reports, written in non-technical language and distributed to coincide with site milestones (such as completion of the site investigation). The EPA will continue to produce fact sheets and updates as site cleanup efforts progress. The EPA uses these materials to provide the community with detailed information in a relatively quick, simple, and easy-to-understand manner. In addition to being distributed to individuals on the site mailing list, fact sheets and site updates also are placed in the information repository and posted on the EPA’s Web site, www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/ naplate. ■■ Establish and maintain the administrative record. The EPA has created and placed the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site administrative record at the Reddick Library and will update it as necessary. The administrative record provides residents with a paper trail of all documents the EPA relied on, or considered, to reach decisions about the site cleanup. ■■ Keep the CIP updated. This CIP presents the EPA’s plan to enhance community input THE EPA MAY OFFER and engagement in key decisions regarding the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site. Before SPEAKERS TO LOCAL the cleanup is complete, the EPA may revise the CIP if the community’s concerns or ORGANIZATIONS, BUSINESS information needs change. CLUBS, AND SCHOOLS AS ANOTHER MEANS OF ■■ Hold public meetings and hearings. A public meeting provides an opportunity for COMMUNICATING IMPORTANT the EPA to present specific information and a proposed course of action. The EPA staff INFORMATION TO LOCAL is available to provide information and answer questions. A public meeting is not a RESIDENTS. formal public hearing where testimony is received. Instead, it might be a meeting to These meetings can be an exchange information or comments. Public meetings provide community members with effective, convenient way for an opportunity to express their concerns to and ask questions of the EPA, state, or local the EPA to interact with the government officials. In addition, the EPA holds informal open-house style meetings, community, convey information, called availability sessions, where residents can meet the EPA experts one on one to and solicit questions and input discuss the activities at the site. Public meetings or informal availability sessions may from targeted groups. be held at various times throughout the investigation and cleanup process. Scheduling meetings should remain flexible to account for technical milestones and public interest. A public hearing is a formal meeting wherein the EPA officials hear the public’s views and concerns about an EPA action or proposal. There are specific regulations about when the EPA is required to consider such comments when evaluating its actions. Public hearings are recorded by a professional transcriber and become part of the administrative record. The comments also are posted to the Web site. The EPA held public meetings in June 2008 and August 2009 at Naplate Village Hall and LaSalle County’s Etna Complex to present site-specific information and solicit community input on a proposed course of action. In February 2010, the EPA’s community involvement coordinator and remedial project manager, Ms. Simmons, informally met with city council members to provide an update on planned and ongoing activities. The EPA will hold another formal public meeting when it issues a proposed plan for the next phase of the cleanup. At this meeting, residents will hear a presentation from the EPA and will have an opportunity to ask questions and provide comments on the proposed plan. A verbatim transcript will be created and placed in the site information repository. Additional meetings will be held as warranted, particularly after site milestones or in response to the community’s request if feasible.
6-3 Work with a community advisory group on technical issues. The EPA may work with or provide assistance to a community advisory group on technical issues. This can provide a way for the community to provide input on site technical issues and become more involved in the decision-making process. It also can provide a way for the EPA to explain, in greater detail, the site technical information. Furthermore, involvement with a community advisory group can provide a forum for the EPA and the various group members to discuss their concerns and learn from each other. Currently, no community advisory group is associated with the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site. ■■ Provide technical assistance grant information. These grants provide federal resources for community groups to hire technical advisors who can help them interpret technical information about the site (such as sampling results or site investigation plans). The EPA will continue to provide information about the program at public meetings and in site fact sheets and other written publications. ■■ Maintain contact with local officials, community leaders and residents through informal visits to the community. The process of community interviews already has established an initial communications link between the community and the EPA. Furthermore, the EPA has designated the site community involvement coordinator as a contact person (Appendix C). Access to a contact person reduces the frustration that may accompany attempts to obtain information and communicate with the several agencies and organizations involved in the cleanup. The community involvement coordinator will maintain contact with the appropriate local officials, community leaders and residents to address any issues that may arise during the investigation and cleanup at the site. The community involvement coordinator and remedial project manager have made occasional visits to the Naplate area to meet with residents and local officials, and will continue to do so to keep community members informed about ongoing and planned site activities. Informal visits provide a forum for the EPA to interact one on one with individuals or small groups and respond directly to questions and concerns. ■■ Solicit input during public comment periods. The EPA holds public comment periods to give community members an opportunity to review and comment on key decisions. Before the EPA selects a final cleanup plan for the site, the Agency will hold a public comment period to allow interested residents an opportunity to review and comment on its proposed plan. The EPA will consider the community’s input before selecting a final cleanup plan. The EPA’s responses to public comments will be summarized in a document called a responsiveness summary, which will be placed in the site information repository and made available on the EPA’s Web site. ■■ Participate in meetings of local community groups. The EPA may offer speakers to local organizations, business clubs and schools as another means of communicating important information to local residents. These meetings can be an effective, convenient way for the EPA to interact with the community, convey information and solicit questions and input from targeted groups. By attending previously scheduled community meetings, the EPA allows residents to participate without having to disrupt or change their schedules. The EPA may also conduct public teleconference calls, if warranted. The remedial project manager and community involvement coordinator may organize public teleconference calls to discuss important ongoing or planned technical milestones. The day, time, and agenda would be announced in sufficient time
6-4 to allow residents to sign up. A preset number of dedicated toll-free phone lines would be arranged for residents’ participation. Public teleconferences are one of many ways to allow a large number of residents to receive information, ask questions, and express their views without having to leave their homes or offices. ■■ Plan or participate in community events. The EPA may participate in local festivals and special events during which the community involvement coordinator can meet with community members to discuss the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site. Other community events that the EPA may organize or participate in include the following: Ice cream social. This informal event, held at a convenient location and time, could be used to attract families, especially those with children, who are interested in how the site affects them but would not attend a public meeting or formal event. Site tours. The community involvement coordinator or remedial project manager may organize site tours to allow community members to walk through and learn more about cleanup activities and plans for future site use. Movie night. To allow community members an opportunity to meet the community involvement coordinator and remedial project manager in an informal setting and learn about ongoing and planned site activities, a movie night could be planned for residents to gather and view an educational film on aspects of the site cleanup or general topics such as hazardous waste prevention. Community members also could have an opportunity to talk informally with representatives from the EPA, Illinois EPA, or local organizations about environmental cleanup issues, potential health effects, site reuse, and other related topics of interest. Evaluate community engagement and outreach efforts and make adjustments as warranted. Throughout the site cleanup process, the EPA will assess the effectiveness of its efforts to implement the activities outlined in this CIP. The EPA may make revisions to its community outreach methods and approaches, and may implement additional activities not mentioned in this CIP, based on feedback from residents and local officials.
6.2 Timeframe for Conducting Community Involvement Activities The following table presents the general timeframe for the activities described in Section 6.1. Community Involvement Activities Timeframe Designate an EPA community involvement coordinator Complete Provide a toll free number Complete, publish in written materials Create and maintain a site mailing list Complete, update as needed Establish and maintain site information repositories Complete, update as needed Maintain contact with local officials, community Ongoing leaders and residents Write community involvement plan Complete, update as needed Provide site and Superfund information on the Internet Ongoing Establish and maintain the site administrative record Complete, update as necessary Provide site and Superfund information on the Internet Ongoing Establish and maintain the site administrative record Complete, update as necessary
6-5 Coordinate with the office of public affairs on news releases As needed Prepare and distribute fact sheets or site updates Quarterly or as needed Hold public meetings and hearings As needed Public notices or newspaper advertisements As needed Evaluate communication efforts Periodically throughout cleanup process Encourage formation of a community advisory group Ongoing Provide technical assistance grant information Ongoing Make informal visits to the community As needed Solicit community input during public comment periods When proposed cleanup plan is completed Participate in meetings of local groups As requested and feasible Conduct public teleconference calls As requested and feasible Plan or participate in community events Quarterly if feasible, or as warranted
6.3 Evaluating the Community Involvement Efforts At key milestones during cleanup, the EPA will evaluate its CIP for the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site. Members of the community may be asked to provide input on the EPA’s efforts to reach out to local residents and keep them engaged and involved in cleanup decisions. Based on community feedback, the EPA may make ongoing adjustments to its communication methods, as well as the frequency of communication, as warranted throughout the site cleanup process.
6-6 7. What is Superfund?
Superfund is the name for the environmental cleanup program legally known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, a federal law enacted in 1980. CERCLA provides the authority through which the federal government can compel people or companies responsible for creating hazardous waste sites to clean them up. CERCLA also created a public trust fund, known as Superfund, to assist with the cleanup of inactive and abandoned hazardous waste sites or accidentally spilled or illegally dumped hazardous materials. The Superfund program is overseen by the EPA, and has four basic goals: ■■ It establishes a system for identifying hazardous substances and listing contaminated sites on EPA’s National Priorities List. Sites are placed on this list when they are found to contain contaminants that have the potential to affect residential areas or impact the environment. ■■ It gives the federal government the authority to clean up a site if the owner or operator cannot be found or does not do the work. ■■ It sets up a trust fund to pay for cleanup activities by imposing a tax on chemical and petroleum companies and other polluting industries. ■■ It makes persons or parties responsible for hazardous releases liable for costs and damages resulting from those releases. Figure 7-1 on Page 7-3 provides an overview of the Superfund process. The Superfund cleanup process begins with site discovery or notification to the EPA of possible releases of hazardous substances. Sites are discovered by various parties, including citizens, state agencies, and the EPA regional offices.
7.1 Hazard Ranking System Once discovered, sites are entered into the CERCLA Hazard Ranking System, the EPA’s computerized inventory of potential hazardous substance release sites. A site is added to the National Priorities List and called a Superfund site if it has a score of 28.5 under the Hazard Ranking System. The Hazard Ranking System considers the relative threat to public health and the environment, using data from site investigations, to assign a score ranging from zero to 100. The score is based on the likelihood that contaminants have been or will be released from the site, the types of contaminants present, and the human population or sensitive environmental areas that could be affected by a release.
7-1 Contrary to popular belief, there is no “most polluted site” on the list, and a site with a higher hazard ranking is not necessarily more contaminated than one with a lower score. While it is a measure of relative threat, the hazard ranking is based on a formula that allows the score to be high even if just one pathway (air, underlying ground water, surface water or soil) score is high. As a result, a moderately contaminated site that impacts air, soil and ground water pathways could have a score similar to an extremely dangerous site that poses a threat through only one pathway (for example, deeply buried, leaking hazardous waste storage drums that threaten drinking wells but have no impact on other pathways). In addition, the Hazard Ranking System takes into account requirements established by CERCLA, EPA policy decisions, and risk assessment principles. Because these relationships are complex, hazard rankings do not imply, for example, that a site with a score of 70 is a greater threat than a site with a score of 50, or that two sites with equal scores should have equal priorities for cleanup action. Following placement on the National Priorities List, the lead agency, whether the EPA or a state agency, conducts an investigation at the site to collect data and determine the nature and extent of contamination. This investigation includes sampling and monitoring of air, water and soil, and evaluates current risks to public health and the environment. Since the investigation and cleanup process takes several years, sites are evaluated early in the process to determine if any short-term or cleanup actions need to be taken. This is the preliminary assessment step. Refer to Figure 7-1 on Page 7-3 for details associated with each step of the cleanup process. As displayed in the flowchart, after the site investigation is completed or under way, several cleanup options are developed. These options are then evaluated against nine EPA criteria to determine which will be most protective of human health and the environment. This process and an explanation of the preferred alternative are described in detail in the proposed cleanup plan.
7.2 The EPA’s Nine Criteria
Threshold Criteria 1. Overall protection of human health and the environment 2. Compliance with applicable or relevant and appropriate federal and state laws
Balancing Criteria 3. Long-term effectiveness and permanence 4. Reduction of toxicity, mobility or volume through treatment 5. Short-term effectiveness 6. Implementability 7. Cost
Modifying Criteria 8. State acceptance 9. Community acceptance
7-2 7.3 The Community’s Role While public participation is encouraged throughout the process, the release of the proposed cleanup plan is a key milestone for public input. Area residents and the general public are encouraged to ask questions and express concerns during a public comment period and at a public meeting. These comments, as well as the EPA’s response to them, are included in a report called the responsiveness summary. At this point, the EPA and other regulatory agencies overseeing the process select what they believe is the most appropriate cleanup option, taking into account public concerns, which are finalized in a legally binding document known as the record of decision. The next step is the cleanup design, which sets out the detailed plans and specifications for the cleanup. The final step is the cleanup action, or actual construction and implementation of the selected option. Under Superfund law, once the responsiveness summary, record of decision and cleanup plan are completed, they become part of the administrative record, a file that contains all documents considered when choosing the remedy for the site. The administrative record is available for public review at information repositories (see Appendix B).
FIGURE 7-1 Superfund Process
7-3 7.4 Superfund Alternative Sites Superfund sites are places where EPA has determined that a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant is located. These areas are entered in EPA’s official site inventory (described in Section 7.1). There are many pathways available to getting a Superfund site cleaned up. Among the best known pathways, for sites that need long-term cleanup, is to list the site on the National Priorities List. Sites on the National Priorities List are eligible THE OTFG SITE for federal remedial (long-term) cleanup funds. IS A SUPERFUND The EPA may also clean up sites eligible for the National Priorities List using other ALTERNATIVE SITE. Superfund and non-Superfund authorities, or States may use their authorities to clean up these sites. Which cleanup pathway is chosen depends on many variables, such as the complexity of the cleanup, the availability of funds (private or public) for the cleanup, and the nature (e.g, private, governmental, Tribal), number and experience of the parties involved at the site. One of EPA’s non-National Priorities List Superfund pathways is referred to as the Superfund Alternative approach. The OTFG site is using the superfund alternative approach. The superfund alternative approach uses the same process and standards for investigation and cleanup as sites on the National Priorities List. Sites using the superfund alternative approach are not eligible for federal cleanup funds. Cleanup funding for sites with superfund alternative agreements is provided by the parties found to be legally responsible for the contamination. In the case of the OTFG site, Pilkington North America is the responsible party. As long as the responsible party enters into a superfund alternative agreement with EPA and stays in compliance with that agreement, there is no need for EPA to list the site on the National Priorities List. If Pilkington North America fails to meet the obligations of the agreement, EPA may reconsider putting the site on the National Priorities List. Currently, sites using the superfund alternative approach are a small percentage of all cleanup agreements.
7-4 8. Community Engagement and the Superfund Process
There are several steps involved in cleaning up a polluted site. Once a polluted or potentially polluted site has been reported to the EPA by individual citizens, state TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE agencies, or others, the EPA follows a step-by-step process to determine the best way EPA’S COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT to clean up the site and protect human health and the environment. Opportunities for AND SUPERFUND PROCESS community involvement occur throughout the process, as shown in Figure 8-1 below PLEASE SEE: and described further in this section. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/ community
EXHIBIT 8-1 The Superfund Process
Reuse
NPL Deletion Maintenance and Reviews
Construction Completion
Cleanup Design and Construction
Cleanup Plan
Study of contamination possible cleanup options Placement on the NPL Site Assessment and Inspection
8-1 8.1 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection The preliminary assessment involves gathering historical and other available information about site conditions to evaluate whether the site poses a threat to people and the environment and whether further investigation is needed. The site inspection tests air, water and soil at the site to determine what hazardous substances are present and whether they are being released to the environment and are a threat to people’s health. Depending on the situation, the EPA may meet with local officials and opinion leaders, communicate potential risks and potential cleanup options to the public, conduct community interviews, prepare a CIP, establish an information repository, release a public notice to local media outlets, and designate the EPA community involvement coordinator. In addition, community members can provide any information they have about the site to the EPA. Opportunities for Community Involvement: Provide any information you have about the site to the EPA.
8.2 Placement on the National Priorities List The National Priorities List includes the most serious sites identified for long-term cleanup. When the EPA proposes to add a site to the National Priorities List, the Agency publishes a public notice about its intention in the Federal Register and issues a public notice through the local media to notify the community, so interested members of the community can comment on the proposal. The EPA then responds to comments received. If, after the formal comment period, the site still qualifies for cleanup under Superfund, it is formally listed on the National Priorities List. Once it is listed, the Agency will publish a notice in the Federal Register and respond formally to comments received. In addition, the EPA may issue a fact sheet or flyer to notify the community impacted by the site. After a site is added to the National Priorities List and a notice is published in the Federal Register, the EPA is required to conduct community interviews, finalize a formal CIP like this one, establish and maintain an information repository and issue a public notice, establish the administrative record, and publish a public notice of availability of technical assistance grants. In addition, the EPA may also develop fact sheets on the site to inform the community about activities at the site. Opportunities for Community Involvement: ■■ Read information about the site and the EPA’s proposal to list the site on the National Priorities List. ■■ Contact the EPA to ask questions or request additional information. ■■ If you have concerns about the site listing, prepare and submit comments during the public comment period.
8.3 Study of Contamination on the Site and Possible Cleanup Options This phase of the process determines the nature and extent of contamination at the site, tests whether certain technologies are capable of treating the contamination, and evaluates the cost and performance of technologies that could be used to clean up the site. Prior to the beginning of this phase, the EPA will begin its outreach and community involvement efforts at the site. The Agency will appoint a community involvement
8-2 coordinator for the site who will work with community members throughout the cleanup process. The EPA staff will interview community members, local officials, and others to gather information about the site and the community and to learn how community members want to be involved in the cleanup process. The Agency then will prepare a CIP that specifies the outreach activities it will use to address the concerns and expectations community members raised in the interviews. The CIP is readily available to the community. The EPA will establish an information repository at or near the site where all correspondence, reports, and documents pertaining to the site cleanup will be stored and available to community members. In addition, the EPA will issue public notices and other documents to communicate important information about the cleanup, including the potential availability of a technical assistance grant or other assistance resources to help the community understand technical information about the cleanup and to better participate in decisions affecting the cleanup. The EPA will establish an administrative record for the site as part of the information repository when the site investigation begins. The Agency will issue a public notice through the local media to notify the community about the administrative record. As the cleanup process moves forward, the EPA will add to the administrative record all the relevant documents used in making the eventual cleanup decision, as well as relevant documents on technologies that were considered but ultimately rejected. To keep the community informed during this phase of the cleanup, the EPA will issue public notices through the local media and conduct public meetings. Based on the results of the site investigation, the EPA will develop a proposed plan for cleaning up the site. The Agency will issue a public notice through the local media to notify the community, so interested members of the community can comment on the proposed cleanup plan. In addition, the Agency may hold a public meeting to discuss the proposed plan. The EPA then will develop a responsiveness summary to formally respond to public comments received. If, based on public comments, the proposed plan is changed substantially, the EPA will issue an explanation of the changes made and invite public comment on the changes. Throughout this phase of the cleanup, the EPA community involvement staff will be working to keep the community informed of progress by conducting public meetings, issuing regular fact sheets about progress at the site, conducting workshops for community groups, and making presentations to civic groups, schools and local officials to help everyone better understand the cleanup process. Opportunities for Community Involvement: ■■ Ask the community involvement coordinator or the remedial project manager questions about the site. ■■ Read the EPA’s proposed plan for cleaning up the site. ■■ Consider whether to form a community advisory group. ■■ Consider whether your community group should apply for a technical assistance grant. ■■ Consider whether your community should request help through the EPA’s Technical Assistance Services for Communities contract.
8-3 ■■ Participate in any public meetings or other EPA events on the proposed plan; ask questions; and provide comments on plans for cleanup and on the reuse options being considered for the site. ■■ If you can’t attend public meetings or other events, visit the information repository and read the proposed plan and other documents. Prepare and send any comments you have to the EPA. ■■ Read the EPA’s responsiveness summary to find out how the Agency plans to address major concerns raised in community members’ comments. ■■ Invite the EPA to attend community events to discuss the site and the proposed plan.
8.4 Preferred Alternative / Cleanup Plan The preferred alternative for a site is presented to the public in a proposed plan which is prepared by the EPA. The proposed plan briefly summarizes the cleanup alternatives studied, highlighting the key factors that led to identifying the preferred cleanup alternative. Public comment is taken on the proposed plan. The Agency responds to the public comments, and then issues a record of decision, which is the cleanup plan for the site. The record of decision explains which cleanup alternatives will be used at National Priorities List sites. It contains information on site history, site description, site characteristics, community participation, enforcement activities, past and present activities, contaminated media, the contaminants present, description of the response actions to be taken, and the remedy selected for cleanup. The record of decision also includes consideration of how the site could be used in the future. The EPA must develop a proposed cleanup plan for public comment. During this stage the EPA will: 1. Develop a proposed cleanup plan and publish public notice of the availability of the plan, a brief summary of the proposed cleanup plan, and an announcement of the public comment period in local newspapers. 2. Place the proposed cleanup plan in the site information repository. 3. Hold a public comment period. 4. Host a proposed cleanup plan public meeting. 5. Provide a meeting transcript. 6. Provide a written responsiveness summary to respond to public comments received. The EPA may have to address significant changes to the proposed cleanup plan prior to selection of the final remedy. If new information significantly changes the basis of the cleanup in the proposed cleanup plan, the EPA will: 1. Issue a revised proposed cleanup plan. 2. Hold a public comment period on the revised proposed cleanup plan. 3. Prepare a written response to significant comments. 4. Publish a public notice of availability of the record of decision in local newspapers.
8-4 Sometimes after the proposed plan is developed, the companies or persons legally responsible for the contamination (potentially responsible parties) will negotiate and enter into settlement agreements, or consent decrees, with the EPA to do the cleanup. To conclude such negotiations, the EPA enforcement staff and the potentially responsible parties may make modifications to the proposed cleanup plan. If modifications are made, the EPA will: 1. Issue a public notice of the proposed agreement in the Federal Register at least 30 days before the agreement becomes final. 2. Provide an opportunity for public comments and consideration of comments received. If fundamental changes to the record of decision are necessary, the EPA will develop an amendment, issue a public notice through the local media to notify the community, and hold a public meeting to discuss the proposed changes and to take comments. The EPA then develops a responsiveness summary to formally respond to public comments received. Opportunities for Community Involvement: Inform the EPA about how the community wants the site to be used in the future. ■■ Read the record of decision for cleaning up the site. ■■ Participate in any public events on the record of decision. ■■ If you can’t attend public events, visit the information repository and read the record of decision and supporting documentation. ■■ Contact the community involvement coordinator or remedial project manager to ask questions or request more information.
8.5 Cleanup Design and Construction This phase of the process includes preparing for and doing the bulk of the cleanup at the site. The EPA develops the final design for the cleanup. Throughout this phase, the EPA community involvement staff will keep community members advised about the progress of the cleanup though periodic public events, newsletters, fact sheets and presentations to civic groups, schools and local leaders. Opportunities for Community Involvement: ■■ Learn about the final design for the cleanup by attending public events or reading the information the EPA distributes. ■■ Work through your community advisory group, technical assistance grant recipient, or the EPA’s Technical Assistance Services Group to stay informed about the progress of the cleanup. ■■ Attend periodic public events about progress at the site. If you can’t attend, visit the information repository and read the site information. ■■ Contact the community involvement coordinator with questions or comments. Visit the site to observe cleanup activities.
8-5 8.6 Treatment Process Completion This is the point in the process when any necessary work for the cleanup has been completed (even though final cleanup levels may not have been reached), or when the EPA has determined that the site qualifies for deletion from the National Priorities List.
8.7 Operation and Maintenance/5-Year Reviews This phase of the process ensures that Superfund cleanups provide for the long-term protection of human health and the environment. The EPA’s activities during this phase will include operating and maintaining long-term cleanup technologies in working order, regularly reviewing the site (every 5 years) to be sure that the cleanup continues to be effective, and enforcing any necessary restrictions to minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination. Site reviews may include examining site data, inspecting the site, taking new samples, and talking with affected residents. The EPA is required to notify the community and other potentially interested parties that a 5-year review will be conducted at their site. Community members may be interviewed to get their views about current site conditions, problems, and concerns Opportunities for Community Involvement: ■■ Work through your community advisory group or technical assistance grant to participate in and review the results of regular site reviews. ■■ Visit the site or arrange a site tour through the EPA. ■■ Invite the EPA community involvement coordinator for the site to your community events to discuss results of the 5-year review. ■■ Plan an event to celebrate major milestones in the cleanup of the site.
8.8 National Priorities List Deletion A site or portion of a site can be deleted from the National Priorities List when the EPA determines that no further response is needed. When the cleanup has been completed and all cleanup goals have been achieved, the EPA publishes a notice of its intention in the Federal Register to delete the site, or portion of the site, from the National Priorities List, and notifies the community of its availability for comment. The EPA then accepts comments from the public on the information presented in the notice and issues a responsiveness summary to formally respond to public comments received. If, after the formal comment period, the site or portion of the site still qualifies for deletion, the EPA publishes a formal deletion notice in the Federal Register and places a final deletion report in the information repository for the site. Opportunities for Community Involvement: ■■ Read the EPA’s proposal to delete the site from the National Priorities List and submit your comments to the EPA. ■■ Read the EPA’s responsiveness summary to find out how the Agency is addressing the public comments received. ■■ Read the final deletion report, which is available at the information repository. ■■ Plan a community event to celebrate deletion of the site from the National Priorities List.
8-6 8.9 Reuse Once the site has been cleaned up, the EPA works with the community through various tools, partnerships and activities to help to return the site to productive use. Such uses can be: ■■ Industrial or commercial, such as factories and shopping malls. ■■ Housing, public works facilities, transportation and other community infrastructure. ■■ Recreational facilities, such as golf courses, parks and ball fields. ■■ Ecological resources, such as wildlife preserves and wetlands. No matter what use is appropriate for a site, the community benefits from restoring the site to productivity, because the property can once again add to the economic, social, and ecological value of the community. The Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site is an example of a site in continued use; the site is occupied by a large architectural glass manufacturer and a chemical company (leasing warehouse space). Further environmental testing is needed to determine future use of a quarry and disposal areas adjacent to the Illinois River. Opportunities for Community Involvement: ■■ Work with the EPA, your local government, and your neighbors to plan the redevelopment of the site. ■■ Explore the redevelopment tools and resources provided by the EPA, (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/tools/an.html). ■■ Be supportive of redevelopment plans once they have been agreed upon.
OTTAWA TOWNSHIP FLAT GLASS SITE IN CONTINUED USE AND AWAITING REUSE
8-7
Appendix A – Glossary
Administrative Record. The body of documents that forms the basis for the selection of a particular response at a site. For example, the administrative record for the cleanup alternative includes all documents that were considered or relied upon to select the remedy through the record of decision. Arsenic. Arsenic is a poison in high doses and a potential cancer-causing compound for humans through prolonged exposure. Cleanup. Actions taken to deal with a release or threat of release of a hazardous substance that could affect humans and/or the environment. The term “cleanup” is sometimes used interchangeably with the terms “remedial action,” “remediation,” “removal action,” “response action,” or “corrective action.” Community. An interacting population of various types of individuals (or species) in a common location; a neighborhood or specific area where people live. Community Advisory Group. A Superfund community advisory group is a way for people in the community to participate in providing coordinated, local input to the decision-making process at Superfund sites. It is a forum for community members to present and discuss their needs and concerns related to Superfund cleanup projects. A community advisory group assists the EPA in making better decisions by providing the Agency a unique opportunity to hear and seriously consider community preferences for site cleanups. Community Engagement. The process of involving communities in all phases of the cleanup process. Communities are asked to provide input on how the cleanup will be conducted and how it may affect community plans and goals. See also community involvement. Community Involvement. The term used by the EPA to identify its process for engaging in dialogue and collaboration with communities affected by Superfund sites. The EPA community involvement approach is founded in the belief that people have a right to know what the Agency is doing in their community and to have a say in it. Its purpose is to give people the opportunity to become involved in the Agency’s activities and to help shape the decisions that are made. Community Involvement Coordinator. The EPA official whose lead responsibility is to involve and inform the public about the Superfund process and response actions. Community Involvement Plan. A plan that outlines specific community involvement activities that occur during the investigation and cleanup at the site. The CIP outlines how EPA will keep the public informed of work at the site and the ways in which residents can review and comment on decisions that may affect the final actions at the site. The document is available in the site’s information repository maintained by the EPA. The CIP may be modified as necessary to respond to changes in community concerns, information needs and activities. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. A federal law passed in 1980 and modified in 1986 by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act. Commonly known as Superfund, CERCLA is intended to protect people’s health and the environment by investigating and cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Under the program, the EPA can either: ■■ Pay for site cleanup when parties responsible for the contamination cannot be located or are unwilling or unable to do the work; or ■■ Take legal action to force parties responsible for site contamination to clean up the site or pay back the federal government for the cost of the cleanup.
A-1 Consent Order (Administrative Order on Consent). A legal agreement signed by the EPA and an individual, business or other entity through which the entity agrees to take an action, refrain from an activity, or pay certain costs. It describes the actions to be taken, applies to civil actions, and can be enforced in court. In limited instances it may be subject to a public comment period. Contaminant. Any physical, chemical, biological or radiological substance or matter that has an adverse effect on air, water, or soil. Contamination. Introduction into water, air, and soil of microorganisms, chemicals, toxic substances, wastes or wastewater in a concentration that makes the medium unfit for its next intended use. Also applies to surfaces of objects, buildings and various household use products. Environmental/Ecological Risk. The potential for adverse effects on living organisms associated with pollution of the environment by effluents, emissions, wastes or accidental chemical releases; by energy use; or by the depletion of natural resources. Hazardous Substance. Any material that poses a threat to human health and/or the environment. Typical hazardous substances are toxic, corrosive, ignitable, explosive or chemically reactive. A hazardous substance is also any substance designated by the EPA to be reported if a designated quantity of the substance is spilled in the waters of the United States or is otherwise released into the environment. Hazardous Waste. Byproducts that can pose a substantial or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly managed. Hazardous wastes usually possess at least one of four characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity) or appear on special EPA lists. Health Assessment. An evaluation of available data on existing or potential risks to human health posed by a Superfund site. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry of the Department of Health and Human Services is required to perform such an assessment at every site on the National Priorities List. Information Repository. A file containing current information, technical reports and reference documents regarding a site. The information repository usually is located in a public building convenient for local residents such as a public school, town hall or library. National Priorities List. The EPA’s list of serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for possible long-term cleanup under Superfund.The list is based primarily on the score a site receives from the Hazard Ranking System. The EPA is required to update the National Priorities List at least once a year. Natural Resources. Land, fish, wildlife, air, water, ground water, drinking water supplies and other such resources belonging to, managed by, or controlled by the United States, a state or local government, any foreign government, any Indian tribe or any member of an Indian tribe Pollutant. Generally, any substance introduced into the environment that adversely affects the usefulness of a resource or the health of humans, animals or ecosystems. Proposed Plan. A plan for a site cleanup that is available to the public for comment. Public Comment Period. A formal opportunity for community members to review and contribute written comments on various EPA documents or actions.
A-2 Public Meeting. Formal public sessions that are characterized by a presentation to the public followed by a question-and-answer session. Formal public meetings may involve the use of a court reporter and the issuance of transcripts. Formal public meetings are required only for the proposed plan and record of decision amendments. Public. The community or people in general or a part or section of the community grouped because of a common interest or activity. Superfund. The program operated under the legislative authority of CERCLA that funds and carries out EPA solid waste emergency and long-term removal and remedial activities. These activities include establishing the National Priorities List, investigating sites for inclusion on the list, determining their priority, and conducting and/or supervising cleanup and other remedial actions. Stakeholder. Any organization, governmental entity or individual that has a stake in or may be affected by the Superfund program. Technical Assistance Grant. A technical assistance grant provides money for activities that help communities participate in decision making at eligible Superfund sites. An initial grant up to $50,000 is available for any Superfund site that is on the EPA’s National Priorities List or proposed for listing on the National Priorities List and where a response action has begun. An additional $50,000 may be provided by the EPA at complex sites. Work Plan. Defines both data needs and the methods needed for the analysis phase. It includes project objectives, data requirements, assessment and measurement endpoints, sampling and analysis procedures, quality assurance objectives and procedures, and a work schedule.
A-3
Appendix B – Site Information Repository, Administrative Record, and Public Meeting Locations
Site Information Repository LaSalle County Court House/ Etna Complex 707 E. Etna Road The information repository is located at: Ottawa, IL 61350 Reddick Library Contact: 815-434-8233 1010 Canal St. Fire Station Ottawa, IL 61350 301 W. Lafayette St. Phone: 815-434-0509 Ottawa, IL 61350 Fax: 815-434-2634 Contact: 815-434-3785 Library Summer Hours: Mon.-Thurs. 9 a.m.-7 p.m.; Ottawa City Hall Fri. & Sat. 9 a.m.- 5 p.m.; Sun. Closed. 301 West Madison Street Library Winter Hours: Mon.-Thurs. 9 a.m.-9 p.m. Fri & Sat Ottawa, IL 61350 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Sun. 12 p.m.- 5 p.m. Contact: 815-433-0161 You may also view site-related documents at: www.epa/ Ottawa Township High School Auditorium gov/region5/cleanup/naplate. 211 E. Main St. Ottawa, IL 61350 Administrative Record Contact: 815-433-1323 The site administrative record is located at: Festivities Unlimited Banquet Hall 1504 Poplar Street Reddick Library Ottawa, IL 61350 1010 Canal St. Capacity: 600 people Ottawa, IL 61350 Contact: 815-433-3200 Phone: 815-434-0509 Fax: 815-434-2634 Holiday Inn Express 120 W. Stevenson Road Library Summer Hours: Mon.-Thurs. 9 a.m.-7 p.m.; Ottawa, IL 61350 Fri. & Sat. 9 a.m.- 5 p.m.; Sun. Closed. Capacity: 50 people Library Winter Hours: Mon.-Thurs. 9 a.m.-9 p.m. Contact: 815-433-0029 Fri & Sat 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Sun. 12 p.m.-5 p.m. Cost: $100 for 8am-9pm EPA Records Center 77 W. Jackson Blvd., 7th Floor Chicago, IL 60604-3590 Phone: 312-886-0900 Hours: Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Possible Public Meeting Locations Naplate Village Hall 2000 W. Ottawa Ave. Naplate, IL 61350
B-1
Appendix C – List of Contacts and Interested Groups
Federal Elected Officials Local Elected Officials
Senator Richard J. Durbin LaSalle County Springfield District Office 525 S. Eighth St. Russell Boe Springfield, IL 62703 LaSalle County Board District #15 3423 E. 2175th Senator Mark Kirk Ottawa, IL 61350 607 East Adams, Phone: 815-433-0184 Suite 1520 Springfield, IL 62701 Thomas Ganiere Congressman Adam Kinzinger LaSalle County Board District #16 Joliet District Office 323 Taylor St. 2701 Black Rd., Suite 201 Ottawa, IL 61350 Joliet, IL 60435 Phone: 815-433-4457 Lou Anne Carretto State Elected Officials LaSalle County Board District #17 Governor Pat Quinn 208 Forest Park Place 222 S. College, Floor 1 Ottawa, IL 61350 Springfield, IL 62706 Phone: 815-433-3753 State Senator Sue Rezin Tom Walsh M103E Capitol Building LaSalle County Board District #18 Springfield, IL 62706 1128 Paul St., PO Box 21 Ottawa, IL 61350 State Representative Frank J. Mautino Phone: 815-434-6750 300 Capitol Building Springfield, IL 62706 Richard Scott LaSalle County Board District #22 State Agencies 2762 E. 1779th Rd. Ottawa, IL 61350 Rick Lanham Phone: 815-433-4962 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1021 N. Grand Ave. East Arratta Znaniecki Springfield, IL 62702 LaSalle County Board District #23 Phone: (217) 782-9881 [email protected] 2532 E 1251st Rd Damon T. Arnold Ottawa, IL 61350 Environmental Toxicologist Phone: 815-433-5176 Illinois Department of Public Health Ted Pumo 22 Kettle River Drive Director of Environmental Health Glen Carbon, IL 62034 LaSalle County Health Department Phone: 618-656-6680, ext. 170 717 Etna Road [email protected] Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone: 815-433-3366 Fax: 815-433-9522
C-1 City of Ottawa Village of Naplate
City of Ottawa Mayor Jim Rick 301 W. Madison St. Village of Naplate P.O. Box 556 Village Hall Ottawa, IL 61350 2000 Ottawa Ave, Phone: 815-433-0161 Naplate, IL 61350 Fax: 815-433-2270 Phone: 815-955-9246 E-mail: [email protected] Lloyd Ludwig Trustee Mayor Robert Eschbach Village of Naplate Shelly Munks - City Clerk 419 22nd Ave. Dale Baxter Naplate, IL 61350 City Commissioner (Streets & Public Improvement) Phone: 815-343-4094 Missy Crawford Edward Whitney Trustee City Commissioner (Public Health & Safety) Village of Naplate Dan Aussem 213 18th Ave City Commissioner (Public Property) Naplate, IL 61350 Phone: 815-433-1329 Geoff Wayne Eichelkraut City Commissioner (Accounts and Finances) Edmund Dougherty Trustee * Council meetings are held at City Hall on the 1st and 3rd Village of Naplate Tuesdays of the month at 7 p.m. 313 21st Ave Naplate, IL 61350 Brian Zeilmann, Police Chief Ottawa Police Department Phone: 815-433-6481 301 W. Lafayette St. Ottawa, IL 61350 Arthur T. Rick, Jr. Phone: 815-433-2131 Trustee [email protected] Village of Naplate 404 24th Ave Jeffrey Newbury, Fire Chief Naplate, IL 61350 Ottawa Fire Department Phone: 815-830-8025 301 W. Lafayette St. [email protected] Ottawa, IL 61350 Gerry Kammerer Phone: 815-434-3785 Village Clerk [email protected] Village of Naplate 112 17th Avenue Naplate, IL 61350 Phone: 815-434-4989
C-2 EPA Media – Radio EPA WCMY-AM/ WRKX-FM 77 West Jackson Boulevard 216 W. Lafayette St. Chicago, IL 60604-3590 Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone: 815-434-6050 Phone: 800-621-8431 Fax: 815-434-5311 www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/naplate. WKOT-FM Nefertiti Simmons 1 Broadcast Ln Remedial Project Manager (SR-6J) Oglesby, IL 61348 Phone 312-886-6148 or 800-621-8431 ext. 6148 Phone: 815-434-4000 [email protected] Fax: 815-434-4055 Heriberto León WGLC-FM Community Involvement Coordinator (SI-7J) P.O. BOX 88 Phone: 312-886-6163 or 800-621-8431 ext 66163 Mendota, IL 61342 [email protected] Phone: 815-539-6751 Fax: 815-539-5956 Information Repository
SODQDQGLWLVEHLQJUHYLVHGE\*HRUJLD3DFL¿F,QLWLDOGDWD FROOHFWLRQIRU$UHDZLOOEHJLQLQODWHIDOOZLQWHURI IRUWK6WUHHW/DQG¿OO7KHDFWLYLWLHVLQFOXGHFDSSLQJ ZLWKH[WHQVLYHVRLODQGVHGLPHQWVDPSOLQJWRRFFXUGXULQJ RIFRQWDPLQDWHGSDSHUUHVLGXDOVDYHQWLODWLRQV\VWHPIRU WKHVXPPHURI ODQG¿OOJDVVHVDQXQGHUO\LQJJURXQGZDWHUPRQLWRULQJ V\VWHPDQGVLWHDFFHVVUHVWULFWLRQV STAGING Mill updates AREA 1 LEFT :LOORZ%RXOHYDUG$6LWH/DQG¿OODIVERSION Plainwell Mill STRUCTURE Public Information Meeting *HRUJLD3DFL¿FVXEPLWWHGDSUHOLPLQDU\FOHDQXSUHSRUW 'XULQJWKHVSULQJRI:H\HUKDHXVHU&RFROOHFWHGVRLO RIVERVIEW DR. WR(3$IRUWKH:LOORZ%RXOHYDUG$6LWH/DQG¿OO7KHRIGHT VDPSOHVIRUWKH3ODLQZHOO0LOOFOHDQXSLQYHVWLJDWLRQDQG DIVERSION FRPSDQ\ZLOOLQVWDOODSHUPDQHQWODQG¿OOFRYHUDODQG¿OOSTRUCTURE REMOVAL AREA 1 Wednesday, Nov. 3 ZLOOSURYLGHDUHSRUWWR(3$LQWKHVSULQJRI%DVHGPlainwell #2 Dam RemovalJDVYHQWLQJV\VWHPDQGDJURXQGZDWHUPRQLWRULQJV\VWHP RQWHUPVRIDVHWWOHPHQWZLWKWKHIHGHUDOJRYHUQPHQW DWWKHODQG¿OO7KHFOHDQXSSODQDOVRLQFOXGHVUHPRYLQJComfort Inn and Conference Center Weyerhaeuser has been investigating and sampling the FRQWDPLQDWHGVRLOIURPQHDUE\ZHWODQGVDQGUHPRYLQJREMOVAL AREA 5A 6:30 p.m. PLOOZLWK(3$RYHUVLJKW(3$H[SHFWVWRUHOHDVHDFOHDQXSNears Completion November 2010 WSOG-FM VKHHWSLOLQJ7KHVHFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVZLOOEHJLQLQ SODQLQDGRFXPHQWFDOOHGDUHFRUGRIGHFLVLRQLQAllied Paper/Portage Creek/Kalamazoo RiverDQGHQGLQ Superfund Site NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY ZLWKFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVWRIROORZ 622 Allegan St. Kalamazoo, Michigan $OOLHG3DSHU/DQG¿OO REMOVAL AREA 4A REMOVAL AREA 5B STAGINGPlainwell Landfill updates AREA 3 (3$LVVWXG\LQJFOHDQXSDOWHUQDWLYHVIRUWKHVLWH(3$ZLOO WK6WUHHW/DQG¿OOThis fact sheet provides updates on the cleanup activities at the AlliedREMOVAL AREA 4B Paper/Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River SuperfundVKDUHFOHDQXSUHFRPPHQGDWLRQVDQGSURSRVHGSODQZLWK site. U.S. Environmental WKHSXEOLFDQGDFFHSWFRPPHQWVLQWKHVSULQJRI %\WKHHQGRI:H\HUKDHXVHUZLOOFRPSOHWH3URWHFWLRQ$JHQF\KDVPDGHVLJQL¿FDQWSURJUHVVDWWKH3ODLQZHOO'DP REMOVAL AREA A FRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHODQG¿OOFDSDQGPRQLWRULQJV\VWHP Informational meeting The public is invited to attend the public meeting (see sidebar for details) to ISLAND 2 learn more about the cleanup activities at the site. EPA is holding a public meeting STAGING AREA 2 :HGQHVGD\1RYWRXSGDWHWKH Plainwell #2 Dam site background community about the Kalamazoo REMOVAL AREA 1 5LYHUFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVIRU ,Q-XQH *HRUJLD3DFL¿F//&DSDUW\UHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKHSROOXWLRQDWREMOVAL AREA 3B
WKHVLWHDQG(3$HQWHUHGLQWRDOHJDODJUHHPHQWFRPPLWWLQJ*HRUJLD3DFL¿FDOUGLAS AVE Reddick Library 7KHPHHWLQJZLOOVWDUWDW SP at the Comfort Inn and Conference WRFRQGXFWDQHPHUJHQF\FOHDQXSLQWKH3ODLQZHOO'DPDUHD'XULQJ &HQWHU$OOHJDQ6W3ODLQZHOO WKHODVWWZR\HDUV*HRUJLD3DFL¿FSHUIRUPHGVLJQL¿FDQWVRLODQGVHGLPHQW REMOVAL AREA 2 PXG VDPSOLQJLQWKLVORFDWLRQ%DVHGRQWKHVHVDPSOHV(3$GHWHUPLQHG ISLAND 1
EPA representatives and other WKDWDFOHDQXSVKRXOGRFFXUQHDUWKH'DPWRVWRSWKHFRQWLQXLQJUHOHDVH RI¿FLDOVZLOOPDNHDIRUPDO RI3&%V3&%VRUSRO\FKORULQDWHGELSKHQ\OVDUHFKHPLFDOFRPLEGEND SRXQGVZLWKfibers. recycled of made paper on printed is sheet fact This presentation and then be available common industrial uses. At high concentrations and exposures they can cause 0
WRGLVFXVVWKHVLWHDFWLYLWLHVZLWK LOOQHVVLQSHRSOHDQGZLOGOLIHREMOVAL AREA BOUNDARY Plainwell #2 Dam Removal Nears Completion Nears 600 Removal Dam #2 Plainwell you individually. If you need special ROAD CENTERLINE DFFRPPRGDWLRQVDWWKHPHHWLQJ GRAPHIC SCALE 1,200 ,Q DFWLYLWLHVEHJDQWRUHPRYH3&%FRQWDPLQDRAILROAD WHGVRLODORQJWKHQRUWK FEET contact EPA Community Involvement VLGHRIWKH.DODPD]RR5LYHUDVSDUWRIWKH3ODLQZHOO'DPFOHDQXSSODQ 1837 US Highway 6 MEDIAN WATER LINE (APPROXIMATE) &RRUGLQDWRU'RQGH%ODVLR VHH CLEARING/GRUBBING COMPLETE
$SSUR[LPDWHO\ IHHWRIULYHUEDQNZHUHFOHDUHGH[FDYDRIVER WHGDQGUHVWRUHG
REMOVAL COMPLETE EHORZ E\2FW $SSUR[LPDWHO\FXELF\DUGVRIVRLODQGGHEULVZSITE: HUHWDNHQIRUGLVSRVDOSUPERFUND RIVER CREEK/KALAMAZOO PAPER/PORTAGE ALLIED
Contact EPA 'XULQJWKHZLQWHURIFOHDQXSDFWLYLWLHVEHJDQRQWKHVRXWKVLGHRIWKHREMOVAL AND REPLANTING COMPLETE .DODPD]RR5LYHULQFOXGLQJH[FDYDWLRQGUHGJLQJDQGGLVSRVDORI3&%CLASS FIRST AREAS TARGETED FOR REMOVAL IN 2010 For more information or if you have contaminated soil and sediment. comments about the Kalamazoo River
FOHDQXSFRQWDFW Completed Plainwell #2 Dam cleanup activities Don de Blasio (3$KDVUHPRYHGDWRWDORIFXELF\DUGVRIFRQWDPLQDWHGVRLODQGREQUESTED SERVICE RETURN Community Involvement Coordinator VHGLPHQWDORQJIHHWRIULYHUEDQNLQWKLVDUHD'XULQJWKH DQG (3$5HJLRQ 6(- FOHDQXSFXELF\DUGVRIVRLODQGVHGLPHQWZHUHUHPRYHGIURP :-DFNVRQ%OYG&KLFDJR,/ OLQHDUIHHWRIULYHUEDQN0RUHWKDQVTXDUHIHHWRIULYHUEDQN KDYHEHHQUHVWRUHGLQFOXGLQJUHSODQWLQJZLWKQDWLYHYHJHWDWLRQ7KH 1010 Canal St. RU 3ODLQZHOO'DPFOHDQXSSURMHFWZLOOEHFRPSOHWHGDWWKHHQGRI ([WZHHNGD\V DPWR 3 SPGHEODVLRGRQ#HSDJRY Additional cleanup studies You can read more information $)HEUXDU\OHJDODJUHHPHQWUHTXLUHGDGGLWLRQDOVWXG\RIWKH.DODPD]RR about the Kalamazoo River cleanup River and Portage Creek. Planners divided the river and creek into seven RQOLQHDW ZZZHSDJRYUHJLRQVLWHV DUHDVIRUFORVHUH[DPLQDWLRQ$UHDFRQVLVWVRIWKH.DODPD]RR5LYHU NDOSURMHFW EHWZHHQ0RUURZ'DPDQG3ODLQZHOODQG3RUWDJH&UHHNEHWZHHQ&RUN6WUHHW DQGWKH.DODPD]RR5LYHU$OOVRLODQGVHGLPHQWVDPSOLQJDFWLYLWLHVDW$UHD2 KDYHEHHQFRPSOHWHGDQGDVLWHLQYHVWLJDWLRQUHSRUWZLOOEHVXEPLWWHGWR(3$ Peru, IL 61354 LQ$SULO
$SODQIRULQYHVWLJDWLQJWKH3&%FRQWDPLQDWLRQLQ$UHDZKLFKFRQVLVWVRI WKH.DODPD]RR5LYHUEHWZHHQWKHIRUPHU3ODLQZHOO'DPDQGWKH2WVHJR&LW\ Ottawa, IL 61350 'DPZDVVXEPLWWHGWR(3$LQ-XO\(3$VXEPLWWHGFRPPHQWVRQWKH Phone: 815-220-1929 Phone: 815-434-0509 Fax: 815-434-2634 WBZG- FM 3905 Progress Blvd Kathy Clair, Library Director Peru, IL 61354 Rici Dale, Public Services Coordinator Phone: 815-224-2101 EPA Region 5 Fax: 815-224-2066 Record Center Ralph Metcalfe Building, Media – Television 77 West Jackson Boulevard Room 711 WWTO-TV Chicago, IL 420 E. Stevenson Rd. 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday – Friday Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone: 815-434-2700 Media – Newspapers LaSalle County Broadcasting- TV 26 N Rd. Ottawa Daily Times Ottawa, IL 61350 110 W. Jefferson St., Phone: 815-433-6898 Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone: 815-433-2000 Lonny Cain, managing editor
Ottawa Delivered 410 E. Stevenson Rd., Suite D Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone: 815-313-5500
C-3
Appendix D – List of Fact Sheets
June 2008 – No Further Cleanup Proposed for Yards, River, http://www.epa.gov/region5/sites/naplate/pdfs/ottawa-factsheet-200806.pdf August 2009 – Interim Cleanup for Polluted Underground Water Supply, http://www.epa.gov/region5/sites/naplate/pdfs/ottawa-factsheet-200908-B.pdf
flat glass manufacturing process involved grinding and No action option proposed polishing the cast glass with fine silica sand and water. EPA’s proposed cleanup plan calls for no further action at the residential soil operable unit of the OTFG glass The process generated waste in the form of a slurry water contaminationsite because a beneathprevious the cleanup area. Resultsaction (excavation indicate and consisting of mostly sand, water and glass particles there areoff-site two underground disposal of contaminated aquifers of immediate soil) eliminated concern the containing arsenic, which was discharged into the nearby below needthe site. for Anadditional aquifer work. is a large EPA pool found of remainingunderground arsenic Property reuse former quarries for settling of solids. Overflow water water. levelsThe upper pose aquifer,a low actual the St.or potentialPeter Sandstone, threat to ishuman a PNA has taken soil samples from the 56-acre undeveloped went into the Illinois River. The slurry waste in the regionalhealth unconfined or the environment. aquifer that EPAhas been notes affected that not by all of the parcel that is considered part of the OTFG site and results settling areas contains arsenic and is a potential source arsenicarsenic-contaminated contamination from soil the wassite. dug The up lower from aquifer, one of the two show the soil is not affected by arsenic. However, the of contamination in local area soil, sediment and ground the Newresidential Richmond lots Sandstone,because removal has not would been havecontaminated jeopardized ground water beneath the site does contain high levels of No Furtherwater (underground Cleanup supplies of fresh water). Action Naplate by arsenic.the structural Between soundness the two aquifersof the house lies theand Shakopee garage built on the chemical. The property is eligible for reuse, although municipal wells are currently not affected by arsenic. Dolomite,top of athe 150-200-foot contaminated thick soil. rock EPA layer will thatwork forms with anPNA to EPA projects that at a minimum, ground water-use effective barrier between the St. Peter Sandstone and New restrictions may have to be placed on the land to protect United States ProposedPilkington North for America Yards, Inc. known as PNA River purchased place institutional controls on the affected property. That
Environmental Protection June 2008 Richmondwill ensure Sandstone. if the buildings are removed in the future, human health and the environment. the glass manufacturing facility in 1986, about 16 years fibers. recycled of made paper on printed is sheet fact This Agency
Ottawa Townshipafter the Flatuse of Glass arsenic Site in the glass-making process was ArsenicPNA levels or any in successor the St. Peter corporation Sandstone will range excavate from the a few Next steps
contaminated soil from the yard and properly dispose of it Naplate, Illinoisdiscontinued. However, EPA considers PNA to be a parts per billion at the edges of the contaminated plume of In consultation with state partner Illinois EPA, EPA will Sediment Soil, for Needed off-site. potentially responsible party for area arsenic pollution. water to several parts per million in the center, about 800 review comments received during the public comment U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has concluded a previous soil timesEPA’s higher proposed than the plan safe also drinking calls for water no action standard. on the The period June 16 – July 16 and the public hearing June cleanup actionSite on investigation two residential lots in Naplate should be sufficient to St.Illinois Peter Sandstone, River Sediment however, operable is not unit currently because used contaminant for 24 before making a final decision on a cleanup plan for reduce the Soilpotential health threat from any arsenic found in area soil. EPA drinkinglevels documented water. The inNaplate the river municipal mud next well to thedraws site water pose residential soil and river sediment in Naplate.
Your opinions wanted also foundPNA arsenic conducted levels are soil low sampling enough in in Naplate Illinois residentialRiver sediment areas (mud) froma low the actual New orRichmond potential Sandstonethreat to human aquifer, health which or theis not Cleanup Further No Site: Glass Flat Township Ottawa You can comment on EPA’s When a decision is made it will be published in a that a cleanupin late project 2002 and there discovered is not justified. high arsenic Arsenic levels was anin bothingredient of contaminated.environment. proposed cleanup alternatives for document called a “record of decision” (ROD) and a glass-makingshallow at the(0 to Ottawa 6 inches) Township and deeper Flat Glass(greater facility, than 12 also inches) known as the residential soil and Illinois Previous cleanup work notice will be published in a local newspaper so residents Libby-Owens-Fordsoil in two residential Plants 5 & yards 7, from near 1907-1970. the factory. It was later River sediment areas at the Ottawa PNA, under EPA oversight, began an emergency cleanup can review it at the information repositories for the site.
determined arsenic-tainted material had been removed Township Flat Glass site. A public An in-depth study called a “remedial investigation” of the arsenic levelscalled in a “time-critical removal action” at two residential CLASS FIRST from the facility and used to fill in low spots on the lots so comment period will run: residential soil and river mud was conducted according to EPA’s Superfundyards in December 2003, excavating soil that contained procedures.that a home The Agencycould be decided built on two one “no of them.action” alternatives proposed in June 16 – July 16, 2008 elevated arsenic levels and disposing of the earth in an the cleanupPNA expanded plan would the residentialprotect people’s soil sampling health and program the environment. in off-site The landfill. While this work was being done the You can e-mail your comments to remedial2003 toinvestigation include additional looked testingat the nature at residences and extent located of arsenic foundresidents in were temporarily relocated. PNA backfilled the EPA Project Manager Kevin Adler Naplatevery near soil theand areaIllinois of the River two sediment affected andproperties. calculated The actual or potentialexcavations with clean soil and reseeded the lots. The at [email protected] or fill out healthresidential risks. EPAsoil-sampling experts found program no unhealthy was expanded levels again of arsenic in in residentialremoval action was completed in July 2004. PNA also and mail the pre-addressed comment soilfall samples, 2005 to coverexcept most at two or yardsall of thewhere homes the contaminatedor lots in the soil hashired already contractors to clean up arsenic-tainted dust inside
form inserted in this fact sheet. beenvillage. removed. More than The 2,000arsenic soil concentrations samples were in taken the Illinois from River sediment
one of the homes in 2006. 60604 IL Chicago,
Another opportunity to share your aboutwere also210 discoveredNaplate yards. to be The at levelssampling that project will not indicated harm people or the Blvd. Jackson W. 77 Risks to people and the environment (P-19J) Division Superfund
opinions, comments and questions theenvironment. highly contaminated fill material had not been placed
Region 5 5 Region
about the proposed cleanup plan will onThe any public other lots.can offerArsenic EPA levels their in opinions the residential on these soil recommendations Health through risk studies were done on residential soil in Agency
be at the public hearing scheduled were found to be within the normal arsenic levels in north Naplate, Illinois River sediment and ground water. Protection Environmental a comment period June 16 - July 16, 2008. EPA will also hold a public States United on: No Further Action centralhearing Illinois on Junesoil. 24. Based on comments and statements received by the Proposed for Naplate Soil, Tuesday, June 24 Human health risk calculations were performed for 7 – 9 p.m. Illinoispublic, River EPA could modify its recommendations or choose anotherthe 210 cleanup Naplate residential areas based on the arsenicIllinois River Sediment Cleanup option (see adjacent box for more information on how you samplingcan participate results, in and the cancer risks for both adults and Naplate Village Hall PNA took sediment and water samples from the Illinois this process). children were found to be low. For the river sediment with 2000 W. Ottawa Ave. River around the plant property in 2001 and 2002. EPA above-normal arsenic levels both human cancer risks and determined the water quality was unaffected by arsenic Oral comments will be recorded at About the Ottawa Township Flat Glass sitethe risks of hurting wildlife were also low. from the site. Also, the only sediment area that contained EPA contacts the hearing and you can also submit The Ottawa Township Flat Glass (OTFG) site covers 228 acres and consists Proposed Cleanup Plan The following EPA team members arsenic above normal levels is located next to the site on The potential cancer risks due to elevated arsenic levelsComment Period June 16 – July 16 written statements. of Naplate residential areas, Plant #5 and Plant #7, former silica sand can be contacted for more the north quarries,edge of the wastewater river. disposal areas and a 56-acre undevelopedin ground parcel water of are very high. Should this water be used information or questions about the for drinking purposes, it would pose an unacceptable risk Your comments are important. EPASource Areasland andlocated Ground on the Water north side of the Illinois River. It also includes additional Public Hearing – June 24 Ottawa Township Flat Glass site: may modify or pick another cleanup former silica quarries and wastewater disposal areas acrossto human from health. the main EPA is calculating actual or potential alternative based on public input.PNA installed a number of ground-water monitoring wells human health risks and is studying cleanup methods for Kevin Adler facility on the south side of the river. Remedial Project Manager in 2002-04 in and around the site and has sampled nearby the ground water. The Agency plans to release a separate (details inside) EPA Region 5 More information private wells EPAto determine divided thethe OTFGnature siteand intoextent four of portionsground called “operable units” or proposed cleanup plan for site ground water in mid-2009. Superfund Division An administrative record containing OUs for ease of investigating and cleaning up the site. These include: OU1Aerial view of the OTFG site. Naplate residential areas are at the top of the frame, and the In the meantime, Naplate residents are safe because the 312-886-7078 official documents about the Ottawa Residential Soils, OU2 Illinois River Sediment, OU3 Groundwater and village draws its drinking water from an uncontaminated [email protected] Township Flat ReddickGlass site Library can be , Source Areas south of the river, and OU4 Groundwatersource. and Source Areas viewed at the EPA north of the river. This proposed cleanup plan is for OU1 and OU2 only. Cheryl Allen 1010 Canal St., Ottawa, or the EPA plans to release a proposed cleanup plan for OU3 and OU4 within the Community Involvement 2 Illinois River is at the lower right. Coordinator Records Center, 7th Floor, Metcalfe next year. 3 Federal Building, 77 W. Jackson EPA Region 5 Superfund Division Blvd., Chicago. The manufacturing plant has been making flat glass products since about 1907. Arsenic trioxide was a minor ingredient in the manufacturing process 312-353-6196 from 1907 until 1970 when its use was discontinued. The final step in the [email protected]
D-1 D-2 Appendix E – Interview Questions
Community Interviews Questions (May 24-26, 2011) 1. How long have you lived at your current address? 2. Do you rent or are you the owner of the property? 3. Do you operate a business from your property/ do you own other properties in the community? 4. What do you know about the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site? 5. Have you, or do you have friends or family who have worked on the site? 6. Do you have any concerns about the site? 7. Has your property or water ever been tested? If so, were the results ever explained to you? 8. Do you think the site, in its current state, poses any risks to you or your children? 9. Has your enjoyment of the area been affected by the site? 10. What government officials have you interacted with about the site? Do you feel these officials have been responsive to your concerns? 11. How frequently do you think public meetings about the site should be held? Would you attend? 12. What is a good meeting location? 13. Are you interested in receiving more information about the site? If yes, what’s the best way to provide that information to you (e-mail, regular mail)? 14. What type of media (e.g. newspaper, Internet, radio) do you generally rely on for news and information? What stations and papers do you prefer? 15. When possible, site information is posted on EPA’s Web site. Have you used the EPA Web site? www.epa. gov/region5/cleanup/naplate 16. How interested are you in environmental issues in general? 17. Are there any other people or groups you think we should talk to about the Ottawa Township Flat Glass Site either because they have unique information about the site, or because they would like to know more about the site from EPA? 18. Concerning redevelopment, once the site is cleaned up how would you like the land to be used?
E-1